Union Minister Kiren Rijiju introduced the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2025, in Lok Sabha on Wednesday, and took aim at the UPA government's 2013 amendment to the Waqf Act.

Advertisment

He specifically questioned the powers granted under Section 108 of the Act.

Highlighting the three major amendments made by the UPA government, Rijiju said, "In 2013, right before the Lok Sabha elections in 2014, there were some steps taken which will raise questions in your mind. In 2013, the act was changed to allow Sikhs, Hindus, Parsis and others to create Waqf. Everyone knows Waqf is for Muslims to create Waqf in the name of Allah."

He then added that the UPA government made the Waqf board-specific, providing an overriding effect with section 108. 

Advertisment

"This change was made by Congress in 2013. Congress made the boards specifics, only Shias in Shia boards...A section 108 was added that Waqf will have an overriding effect over every other law. How can this section be acceptable?" Rijjiju said.

He then alleged that the UPA government, under these changes, denotified 123 properties and handed them to the Delhi Waqf board, including the CGO Complex and the Parliament building.

"A case ongoing since 1970 in Delhi involved several properties, including the CGO Complex and the Parliament building. The Delhi Waqf Board had claimed these as Waqf properties. The case was in court, but at that time, the UPA government denotified 123 properties and handed them over to the Waqf Board. If we had not introduced this amendment today, even the Parliament building we are sitting in could have been claimed as Waqf property. If PM Modi Govt did not come into power, several properties would have been de-notified," Rijiju said. 

Advertisment

"Waqf Bill is not interfering in any religious system, any religious institution, or any religious practice in any way," he claimed.

Rijiju further clarified that the proposed amendments do not interfere with the management of mosques, temples, or any other religious institutions, seeking to alleviate concerns.

"It is simply a matter of property management. However, Waqf properties are managed by the Waqf Board and the Mutawalli. If someone fails to understand this basic distinction or deliberately chooses not to, then I have no solution for that," Rijiju added.

(With inputs from agencies)