On April 3, 2025, the Indian Parliament passed the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, ushering in significant changes to the Waqf Act, 1995. Touted by the government as a move to improve transparency and administrative accountability in the management of Waqf properties, the bill has reignited debate over its broader implications particularly in contentious cases like the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura.

While the law does not directly reference specific sites or religious conflicts, its provisions are being closely scrutinized for how they might influence ongoing litigation over religious land, including the high-profile legal battle where the Hindu side seeks to reclaim land adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple—currently occupied by the Shahi Idgah mosque.

Empowering District Collectors: A Shift in Authority

A cornerstone of the amendment is the empowerment of District Collectors to investigate and determine the legal status of properties claimed as Waqf—especially where disputes exist or the property is also claimed as government land.

This provision could have consequences for the Krishna Janmabhoomi case. In hearings before the Allahabad High Court in May 2024, the Sunni Central Waqf Board was reportedly unable to furnish definitive title documents proving ownership of the mosque site. The Hindu litigants argue that the mosque stands on the temple’s sanctum land, and the Collector’s new authority might prompt a re-examination of such ownership claims.

Legal expert Ravi Shankar Prasad, former Union Law Minister, notes, “The amendment opens a path for local administrative review where earlier only the Waqf Boards had a say. That significantly alters the dispute resolution dynamics.”

“Waqf by User” Doctrine Faces New Scrutiny

Equally consequential is the bill’s softening of the “waqf by user” principle—a legal doctrine that historically allowed a property to be classified as Waqf based on longstanding religious use, even in the absence of formal records.

The amended bill affirms that existing “waqf by user” registrations will remain valid unless actively disputed or found to be on government land. In the context of the Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute, the 1968 compromise agreement—in which the Idgah’s Waqf status was purportedly accepted—has been challenged by Hindu petitioners on the grounds that the deity, Lord Krishna Virajman, was not a signatory, and therefore the agreement lacks legal sanctity.

“The bill allows courts or Collectors to re-investigate old claims. This could have a direct bearing on the mosque’s legal standing,” said senior advocate Harish Salve, commenting on the potential scope of the amendments.

Dilution of Waqf Board Autonomy

The new legislation strips Waqf Boards of their unilateral authority to declare properties as Waqf. Henceforth, such declarations must undergo scrutiny by government authorities, with appeals lying directly to High Courts—not just Waqf Tribunals.

This clause addresses a long-standing grievance of Hindu litigants, who have accused the Waqf Boards of arbitrarily classifying properties and “encroaching” on heritage land. In Parliament, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, while tabling the bill, stated, “This amendment aims to ensure fairness and transparency. No body should have unchecked powers over property matters, especially those that are historically or legally contentious.”

This change could bolster the Hindu side’s efforts in court by allowing higher judicial oversight of Waqf classifications, particularly in sensitive and disputed zones like the Krishna Janmabhoomi.

No Direct Mention—But Substantial Implications

Despite the indirect nature of the bill’s language, political and legal observers see its potential ramifications. The Krishna Janmabhoomi case currently involves 18 consolidated suits seeking removal of the mosque and restoration of temple land.

While the bill doesn’t mention Mathura or any religious site explicitly, opposition leaders like AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi argue it “targets minority property rights under the garb of efficiency.” Muslim organizations, including the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, have expressed concerns that the bill could be weaponized against Islamic religious institutions.

Supporters, however, insist it serves national interest. “It will help bring back the cultural and historical glory of our sacred sites,” said Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, head of the Ram Janmabhoomi Trust, in a press briefing shortly after the bill’s passage.

The Places of Worship Act, 1991: A Legal Hurdle?

Importantly, any attempt to remove the Shahi Idgah would still need to contend with the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which mandates maintaining the religious status of sites as they existed on August 15, 1947. The Hindu side maintains that the Act does not apply to Krishna Janmabhoomi, citing its unique nature as the birthplace of a deity, and the fact that the 1968 agreement itself is under judicial review.

A Legal, Political, and Cultural Crossroads

In essence, the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025, equips the state with tools to reassess the legal status of Waqf properties, particularly those lacking clear documentation or mired in historical disputes. For the Krishna Janmabhoomi case, it could indirectly bolster efforts to reclassify the mosque land—if the courts and authorities act in tandem.

But legal experts caution against assuming outcomes. As constitutional scholar Faizan Mustafa recently remarked, “The bill provides mechanisms, not verdicts. The courts will still have the final word.”

The road ahead remains complex and contested. With litigation ongoing, and political narratives intensifying, the true impact of this legislation on India’s most sensitive land disputes will unfold in the months to come.

If You Like This Story, Support NYOOOZ

NYOOOZ SUPPORTER

₹ 10 - ₹ 1000

NYOOOZ FRIEND

₹ 2000 - ₹ 5000

Your support to NYOOOZ will help us to continue create and publish news for and from smaller cities, which also need equal voice as much as citizens living in bigger cities have through mainstream media organizations.