New Delhi: The recent enactment of the Waqf Amendment Act 2025 by the Indian Parliament has sparked a heated debate and raised concerns among the Muslim community in India. The law, which aims to enhance the transparency and governance of waqf properties, has been criticized for potentially undermining the religious autonomy of Muslim institutions and marginalizing the country’s largest religious minority.

The Act imposes stricter regulations on the management of waqf properties. Key provisions include the requirement for central government approval for leasing or selling properties, digitization of waqf records, and harsher penalties for mismanagement. Notably, it also allows for the inclusion of non-Muslims on waqf boards, a provision that has drawn significant criticism.

Proponents argue that these changes are necessary to combat corruption and ensure accountability within waqf institutions. However, critics, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), view the Act as an overreach that infringes upon religious rights. They argue that the inclusion of non-Muslims in waqf administration, without similar provisions for Hindu temple trusts, is discriminatory.

Opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, have voiced concerns that the Act is part of a broader agenda to weaken minority institutions and promote Hindutva ideology. The situation has drawn parallels with changes in Kashmir following the revocation of Article 370 in 2019, where increased central control and restrictions have been justified under the guise of development.

The AIMPLB has strongly opposed the Act, with spokesperson S.Q.R. Ilyas describing it as a strategic move to undermine waqf properties. He claims that the amendments aim to manipulate the status of waqf properties across the country.

India’s constitution declares it a secular republic, but critics argue that recent actions suggest a shift towards majoritarianism. The Waqf Amendment Act is seen as part of a broader pattern of laws that erode the cultural and institutional identity of minorities while empowering Hindu religious institutions.

The Act is perceived not merely as an administrative reform but as a political tool that challenges India’s secular framework. By drawing comparisons with governance in post-Article 370 Kashmir, a pattern emerges of eroding Muslim autonomy under the pretext of regulation and integration.

As India progresses further into the ideological project of Hindutva, the distinction between governance and religious dominance becomes increasingly blurred, raising questions about the future of India as a pluralistic democracy.