Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? Narendra Modi’s politics regarding the Waqf Board fits within his larger ideological framework and his vision for India as a Hindu-majority nation with uniform laws and governance, often under the banner of “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas.” However, critics argue that his approach often matches with Hindutva politics, aiming to restrict Muslim-centric legal and institutional structures while dovetailing them into a broader national framework.
The Waqf Board and its relevance
The Waqf Board is a statutory body in India that controls properties and financial resources donated for religious, educational, and charitable purposes by the Muslim community. It holds huge tracts of land and valuable properties across India, making it a significant institution. The tracts of land amount to more than six lakh acres.
The privileges under Muslim personal law, which many in the BJP see as a contrary to the idea of “One Nation, One Law, notwithstanding the massive properties under Hindu shrines, temples and religious places or trusts. The Board’s influence in shaping community policies and religious affairs, making it a target for political manoeuvring.
Modi’s Waqf Board Politics
Modi’s government has pushed for audits and surveys of Waqf properties, arguing that they have been misused or illegally occupied. In 2023, the Modi government ordered a review of Waqf properties across India, raising concerns within the Muslim community about a possible takeover or redistribution.
The Government scrapped several Waqf laws in 2014, citing the need for rationalization of land records and uniform governance. Many BJP leaders argue that the Waqf Board operates like a parallel land authority favouring Muslims, which contradicts their push for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC).
The Central Waqf Council (CWC) was brought under stricter government scrutiny, with increasing influence from BJP-appointed administrators. The BJP has accused opposition parties, particularly Congress and regional parties, of using Waqf Boards for vote-bank politics and appeasement.
Modi’s government has framed the regulation of Waqf properties as part of a broader push towards UCC—arguing that there should be no special laws for any religious community. The abolition of Triple Talaq and the move to regulate Waqf properties are seen as steps toward tampering Muslim-specific legal privileges.
Ending “minority appeasement” – Modi has consistently framed Waqf-related policies as removing special privileges for Muslims, under the garb of a “level playing field.”, integrating Muslims under “Indian” identity rather than separate religious identity by regulating Waqf properties under common governance, Modi seeks to curb what the BJP sees as an exclusive Muslim sphere.
A Hindu-majority democracy with uniform laws – Modi’s approach to the Waqf Board is in line with the broader Hindutva agenda, which opposes special religious institutions that function independently of state control.
The regulation of Waqf properties aligns with its core Hindu nationalist voter base while projecting an image of a strong, decisive government. Congress and regional parties like TMC, AIMIM, and SP see these moves as an attack on minority rights and secularism. There is widespread apprehension that Waqf properties may be gradually taken over or weakened.
Narendra Modi’s policies regarding the Waqf Board and other minority-specific institutions align with a broader Hindutva-driven vision of India. The Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological backbone of the BJP, has long visualised an India where Hindu cultural and legal supremacy is established—something that critics argue is similar to making India a Hindu Rashtra.
The gradual erosion of Muslim institutions, special laws, and autonomy suggests that Modi’s government is moving towards a gradual transformation of India’s secular framework. While Modi has never directly called for replacing the Indian Constitution with Manusmriti, many of his government’s policies have indirectly contributed to destroying Nehruvian secularism and creating a Hindu-first governance model.
RSS and the Manusmriti Vision: A Hindu Rashtra Blueprint?
The RSS, since its inception, has viewed India as a Hindu civilization and rejected the concept of secularism as an imported concept. Some of its founders, like M.S. Golwalkar and Vinayak Savarkar, promoted a vision where Hindu culture and laws should be the guiding principle of governance. Minorities, particularly Muslims and Christians, should assimilate or accept a secondary status.
The Manusmriti, an ancient Hindu legal text, was respected by the RSS leaders as an alternative to the Indian Constitution, though Modi himself has never promoted it directly, his policies—especially on minority rights—often matches with RSS objectives
Modi’s Policies That Align with RSS’ Hindu Rashtra Goals
The Modi government criminalized instant Triple Talaq, which was projected as a step towards gender justice. However, many saw it as state interference in Muslim personal laws, a step towards dismantling Sharia-based legal privileges. The move to survey and control Waqf lands is seen as an attempt to curb the autonomy of Islamic institutions, just as the government took over Hindu temples under state control in many states.
Citizenship and Identity Politics
The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) clearly favoured Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, and Christians from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan while excluding Muslims—marking a legal step toward religious-based citizenship. The National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam and Uttarakhand disproportionately affected Muslims, reinforcing the idea of “outsiders” versus “insiders.” The revocation of Kashmir’s special status was seen as a step toward integrating India’s only Muslim-majority state into a centralized Hindu-first governance structure.
Hindutva Symbolism in Governance
Modi personified the inauguration of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, crossing the line between state and religion. This was a direct fulfilment of the RSS’ long-standing demand to undo the so-called “injustice” of Babri Masjid. The removal of Mughal history and reducing emphasis on Nehruvian secularism in NCERT books is part of an attempt to rewrite India’s history from a Hindu-nationalist perspective.
Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? Phrasal transformation
The declaration of India as a Hindu state is unlikely to happen through a single event, but rather through various legal, institutional, and political stages. It has been Modi’s phrasal approach.
First Phase (2014-2019):
Targeting minority-specific institutions (Triple Talaq, Waqf reforms), Building legal precedents for Hindu supremacy (Ram Mandir case), a soft Hindutva consolidation
Second Phase (2019-2024):
Revoking Article 370 (end of special status for Muslims), Citizenship Amendment Act (introducing religion as a factor in citizenship) and temple-cantered nationalism (Ram Mandir, Kashi, Mathura discussions) by way of institutional and legal transformation.
Third Phase (2024 and beyond)
Uniform Civil Code (UCC) to end personal laws for Muslims and Christians, further control over Muslim institutions (Madrasas, Waqf lands, Urdu education), rewriting the Constitution to reflect “Bharatiyata traditions. —this could be a step towards replacing secular laws with Hindu legal principles and a full Hindu State.
Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? Can India officially become a Hindu state?
India’s Constitution clearly defines it as a secular state, and any move to remove secularism would require a constitutional amendment, which could be challenged in the Supreme Court. India has nearly 20 crore Muslims, making it difficult to impose exclusive Hindu laws without backfire. Western democracies and Islamic countries could exert economic and diplomatic pressure if India officially declared itself a Hindu state.
Instead of an outright declaration, Modi’s government may continue to make policies that create a Hindu-first state while keeping the constitutional framework intact. The RSS may push for long-term social changes, hoping that a future generation of leaders will make a move towards a Hindu Rashtra.
Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? His attempts to redefine its idea of India?
India’s democracy has in-built safeguards to resist autocratic tendencies or the complete transformation of its secular character. However, systemic damage and weak opposition make it challenging to counter Modi’s push for a Hindu-first governance model.
Safeguards and resultant challenges
The Supreme Court has ruled that secularism is part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution (Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973). This means even a two-thirds majority in Parliament cannot amend or remove secularism from the Constitution. The Supreme Court and High Courts may strike down unconstitutional actions, as seen in the recent cases where government actions against minorities were challenged (e.g., the Karnataka hijab ban case, CAA challenges).
Fundamental rights under Article 25 (freedom of religion), Article 26 (religious institutions’ autonomy), and Article 30 (minority educational institutions) provide constitutional safeguards. The judiciary has been inconsistent in standing up against Modi’s government, often delaying verdicts on crucial cases (e.g., Electoral Bonds, CAA). A politically influenced judiciary could weaken this safeguard. Indian democracy allows voters to reject any government every five years. Even Modi’s BJP has suffered losses in state elections, proving that electoral resistance is possible.
Federalism and State Governments:
Strong opposition-led states (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, West Bengal, Telangana, Punjab, etc.) act as barricades against Hindutva expansion. States have control over education, law and order, and religious institutions, making it difficult for the central government to impose policies.
The ECI is still a constitutional body that has some level of independence in ensuring free elections, although it has faced criticism for favouring BJP in many instances (e.g., delayed action against hate speeches). Modi’s control over media, corporate funding (Electoral Bonds), and institutional appointments raises concerns about how free and fair elections are.
A Free Media and Civil Society Resistance
Despite media capture by pro-BJP outlets, independent platforms, continue to expose government overreach. The Farmers’ Protest (2020-2021) forced the government to withdraw controversial farm laws—proving that mass mobilization can check executive onslaught. Shaheen Bagh protests (2019-2020) against CAA-NRC showcased Muslim protest to discriminatory laws. Crackdowns on activists and journalists (arrests under UAPA, Pegasus spyware, income tax raids) threaten independent voices.
Weak and divided Opposition and lack of a strong national alternative is a great hurdle. Congress, the only national opposition party, is weakened by internal conflicts and leadership crises orchestrated by the BJP cadres. Regional parties (TMC, DMK, Communists in Kerala etc.) are strong in states but fail to form a unified l alliance against BJP, notwithstanding the formation of INDIA front.
Opposition struggles to counter Modi’s nationalist appeal and often tries soft Hindutva (e.g., Rahul Gandhi’s temple visits) instead of firmly defending secularism. Modi has personal push, a strong social media network, and a controlled mainstream media, making it difficult for opposition to gain overcome Modi false magic.
Modi has carefully appointed pro-government judges, bureaucrats, and EC officials, weakening institutional safeguards. Misuse of agencies like ED, CBI, IT Dept. and raids on the opposition leaders while BJP leaders are often untouched (e.g., Maharashtra’s Ajit Pawar’s and Hemanta Biswa Sarma in Asom corruption cases dropped after he joined BJP).
BJP’s policy of fragmenting elections using Hindutva ensures that Hindu-Muslim divisions remain a burning electoral tussle, making opposition’s secular messaging ineffective. Modi uses military strikes and nationalism to build strong emotional appeal among voters, making it difficult for opposition.
Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? Can Modi’s plans be stopped?
If BJP loses its majority, India’s secular democracy could be reestablished. A strong opposition alliance (INDIA front) could confront Modi’s power, but their unity and strategy remain weak. BJP still has dominance in States, so even if it loses power nationally, it may remain strong in many states
Supreme Court or Popular Movements Stop BJP’s Agenda
If Modi tries diversified changes (e.g., constitutional amendments for Hindu Rashtra, Wakf Board amendments, one nation and one election policy amendments), courts and mass movements might counter it. However, judicial independence is under threat, and BJP has shown effective control over mass protests (e.g., crackdown on Shaheen Bagh, farmer protests and anti-CAA protests).
Wakf Board Politics of Narendra Modi – Will he trade-off for Secularism? The Conclusion
Narendra Modi’s Wakf Board politics is not just about land management, it fits into a larger pattern of undermining Muslim institutions and consolidating Hindu supremacy. It matches with the RSS’ goal of negating Muslim influence in governance and establishing Hindu supremacy in public life.
While Modi may not openly declare India as a Hindu Rashtra, his policies are paving the groundwork for a definite transformation. If this drift continues, India may slowly move towards an unofficial Hindu-first governance model, fulfilling the RSS dream.
Narendra Modi’s Waqf Board politics aligns with his broader vision of nation-first governance with uniform laws, but critics see it as a systematic weakening of Muslim institutions under the disguise of reform. The broad picture reveals a fight between the BJP’s push for integration and the resistance from minority groups who fear losing their historical and religious autonomy.
India still has safeguards, but Modi’s systematic weakening of opposition, judiciary, and media makes resistance difficult. If the opposition unites and builds a strong counter-narrative, Modi’s vision of a Hindu-first India can be stopped. If Narendra thinks for a secularism trade-off, India may slowly move towards a soft Hindu Rashtra, even without a formal declaration. India’s future depends on whether its democratic institutions can still function independently, and whether voters choose to resist Modi’s push towards a Hindu-first governance model.