Waqf, the Litmus Test in Bihar

The battle for Bihar 2025 is turning into a fight over the political dividends and risks of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, with the RJD sensing an opportunity in growing resentment against the JD(U)-BJP coalition

- Md Asghar Khan IS SENIOR CORRESPONDENT FROM JHARKHAND

IF he had his way, then former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad’s son Tejashwi Yadav would throw the Waqf (Amendment) Act in the dustbin. The young Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader said this is exactly what his party would do if voted to power in the Bihar Assembly election due by the end of this year. He also accused the ruling BJP at the Centre of using the amendment to “divide the country”.

This prompted Union minister Giriraj Singh of the BJP to accuse him of “going the Bengal way”—a reference to the TMC's refusal to implement the amended law in the neighbouring state, as well as a more veiled one to the widely reported violence during the Waqf protests in Murshidabad.

Clearly, the controversial amendment in the law concerning the legal status and management of property handed over by Muslims to God, according to the faith, for use in charitable purposes is set to face a laboratory test of sorts in the run-up to the Assembly polls, significantly influencing how the battlelines are drawn and the relations among the various parties, and with their bases of social support.

With over 400 of the 3,000-odd properties in Bihar registered under the Sunni and Shia Waqf Boards already in various stages of legal battles at the Waqf Tribunal and the Patna High Court, it is indeed a sensitive issue for the Muslims, who comprise 18 per cent of Bihar's population. After the backward castes (63 per cent) and the Dalits (19.5 per cent), they are the third-largest population group in the state. Among the Muslims, 73 per cent are Pasmanda, i.e. relatively backward. Though the Centre has been claiming that the amended law is especially in the interest of this section, it has not stopped many Muslim organisations from protesting against what they see as a threat to the collective interest of the community.