On 2nd April, during the discussion on the Waqf Amendment Bill, 2024, Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee defended the concept of Waqf and opposed the bill. He called Waqf the “core belief” and an “integral part” of Islam. While doing so, he argued that anyone, including Hindus, Muslims, Christians or otherwise, should be able to donate land or property to a Waqf Board. He also challenged the proposed amendments that remove ambiguous practices like “Waqf by User” and “Verbal Waqf Declarations”.
Interestingly, he conveniently overlooked the fact that the rampant abuse of these provisions has resulted in coercion, illegal land encroachments, and intimidation of non-Muslim landowners, specifically Hindus, whose lands were quietly absorbed into Waqf holdings without their consent.
Defending Islam by mocking the amendment – ‘How can you stop anyone from giving to Waqf?’
In his statement in the House, he railed against the amendment that mandates that a person must be practising Islam for at least five years before dedicating property to a Waqf. He slammed the requirement as unconstitutional and arbitrary while claiming that it violates fundamental rights. He further added that it violates the secular fabric of the country.
"Allow Hindus to give land to Waqf": TMC MP bats for coercion
— OpIndia.com (@OpIndia_com) April 2, 2025
TMC's Kalyan Banerjee wants anyone — even non-Muslims — to be allowed to donate land to Waqf. pic.twitter.com/8ACQ97V1Fc
According to Banerjee, religious practice is a private affair, and thus, no law can restrict a person’s freedom to donate to any religious institution, Waqf included. He tried a superficial comparison with donations to Hindu temples and said, “Even in Kashi Vishwanath, there is no such rule of five years. Why should a Muslim be told how long he has practised his faith before he can donate?”
Banerjee deliberately ignored the context that the Waqf Board is not a voluntary society of believers but a state-backed statutory body that has exercised quasi-judicial powers over land. Enabling any random person, especially non-Muslims, to dedicate their land to it has opened doors to abuse, which has been seen in the past. If a Hindu family is threatened into surrendering their land, the Board can very well “allow it”.
This is precisely why the amendment was brought to strike down the inclusion of non-Muslims and impose clearer checks — that is, to prevent the misuse of Waqf laws as tools of coercion.
Waqf by user – legitimising land grab by camouflaging it as religious sentiment
Moving forward, Banerjee championed the notorious practice of “Waqf by User” where regular use of a property by Muslims for congregational prayers automatically converts it into Waqf land. He cited century-old cases and anecdotes, including one where a Hindu allowed namaz to be offered on his land, and claimed this created an irrevocable Waqf — that too all without any declaration or registration.
If Muslims pray on your land once, it becomes Waqf forever — that’s what ‘Waqf by user’ means.
— OpIndia.com (@OpIndia_com) April 2, 2025
Kalyan Banerjee wants this draconian idea protected. pic.twitter.com/Il0Un1bo0w
He claimed that requiring registration or formal dedication now violates Islamic tradition and Supreme Court verdicts. “How can you ask for a document?” he asked rhetorically, calling the amendment an attack on Islamic freedom.
However, this is where his argument collapsed into dangerous territory. If “Waqf by User” is valid, then anyone’s property, even if temporarily used for a prayer gathering, can be declared Waqf. This is the reason prayers on roads and public properties are seen as a major issue. There have been countless instances where Hindus and other non-Muslim communities have discovered that their ancestral lands had been claimed by the Waqf Board without their knowledge.
The inclusion of Hindus and other non-Muslim communities as potential Waqf donors in earlier laws was a loophole. It legitimised forced land surrenders and gave legal muscle to threats and manipulation. Striking it down was not religious intolerance but legal sanity.
Islam is ‘modern and liberal’ but Waqf is sacred and irrevocable?
Banerjee tried to build a constitutional shield around Waqf by declaring that it is a core religious practice that is protected by Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India. He said, “The core belief of a Muslim is that Allah is there. I am dedicating my property to Allah. Therefore, it is a Waqf property.” He insisted that even a verbal declaration is enough to make land Waqf forever.
‘Islam is modern’ but Waqf can never be reversed?
— OpIndia.com (@OpIndia_com) April 2, 2025
Kalyan Banerjee says Islam is liberal and modern — and yet insists verbal Waqf declarations must be irrevocable. pic.twitter.com/kjbdY98aXe
He then claimed that Islam is an “extremely modern and liberal” religion, suggesting that it welcomes all and denies no one the right to offer prayers. If it is indeed modern and liberal, then why insist on an archaic, irrevocable donation system that lacks even a basic paper trail? He basically contradicted himself in a matter of minutes.
Banerjee claimed that Islam is inclusive but supported a Waqf system that excludes others from objecting once land is captured. He preached liberalism but resisted reforms that ensure transparency and consent.
Conclusion
TMC’s Banerjee’s impassioned defence of Waqf laws exhibited serious implications of allowing unchecked religious land monopolies in a secular democracy. His framing of Islam as both open and irrevocable, championing of Waqf by User, and opposition to any form of regulation exposed a wilful blindness to the realities of coercion and land grab under the pretence of Waqf properties.
The amendments introduced in the Waqf Act are not an attack on any religion but a long-overdue effort to prevent misuse of faith as a weapon against non-Muslim landowners. If Banerjee truly believed in liberty and justice, he would have supported reforms that are going to protect citizens from forced submission, not glorify the system that enables it.
