Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Wednesday sharply condemned the earlier UPA government for de-notifying 123 properties and handing them over to the Delhi Waqf Board. Explaining the necessity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, he said that, in the absence of these legislative amendments, even Parliament's building could have been asserted as Waqf property.
While opposition voices were vocal, Rijiju presented the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025 and the Mussalman Waqf (Repeal) Bill 2025 in the Lok Sabha.
In his speech to the House, he thanked the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) members for engaging in detailed discussion and consultations. Rijiju pointed out that the level of deliberation concerning this bill had been unprecedented in Indian parliamentary history.
He disclosed that the government considered a record number of 97,27,772 petitions put up both offline and online, along with inputs from MoUs, public feedback, and official requests. He asserted this to be the biggest number of people's responses for any bill to have been ever received in Indian history.
In addition, he added that 284 delegations consisting of representatives from different communities, officials from 25 state governments and union territories, legal and religious experts, among others, had actively engaged in debate on the bill.
"I hope very much that even those who opposed it at the beginning will reconsider their position and give their support after the bill is introduced," Rijiju said.
Recalling the history of the amendments in the Waqf Act, he noted that none of the earlier amendments had been termed as "unconstitutional" or "unlawful." He asked what was the rationale for the usage of such words today, criticizing certain critics for confusing the public and creating unnecessary controversy.
He also made a mention of the 1995 amendment, which had set up tribunals to deal with disputes regarding Waqf property. Further, the provision mentioned that in case a Waqf property earned revenue over ₹5 lakh, the government would designate executive officers to administer it.
Targeting the UPA government's 2013 amendment, Rijiju said, "They brought a provision where anyone of any faith—Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists—could form a Waqf property, while Waqf itself is clearly meant for Muslims and their relationship with Allah. And then they prescribed that only Shias can be members of the Shia Waqf Board and Sunnis on the Sunni Waqf Board."
He also questioned Section 108 of the Waqf Act that says "Waqf Board provisions will always override any other law in the country."
"How can one such provision be there in a democratic system?" he questioned.
Carrying on his criticism of the earlier government, Rijiju blamed the UPA government for de-notifying 123 properties and their transfer to the Delhi Waqf Board, directly laying this at the doorstep of the 2013 amendment.
"Were we not to have brought this bill, even Parliament buildings could have been de-notified as Waqf property. If the Modi regime had not taken action, God knows how many more properties would have been de-notified," he said.".
Repudiating allegations of interference by the government in religious institutions, he referred to Article 25(1) of the Constitution which ensures religious freedom but subjects it to the order of public order, morality, and health.
"The government is not intruding into any religious buildings, practices, or activities. The Waqf Bill is entirely about property administration," he clarified.
The bill draws from earlier amendments, such as the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, that also sought to achieve similar aims. The government still hopes the proposed reforms will garner broad-based support across parties.
Read also| Lok Sabha Erupts as SP Leads Opposition Protest Against Waqf Bill
