Back-to-back protests against the Waqf Act
Two major demonstrations are scheduled on consecutive days in Hyderabad to oppose the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025
The first protest, scheduled for May 31, is being organised by the Joint Action Committee (JAC), a collaborative effort of socio-religious groups such as Tehreek Muslim Shabban, and political figures including Amjed Ullah Khan, the spokesperson of the Majlis Bachao Tehreek. Members of the Congress party have also extended their support to the protest.
According to JAC convenor Mushtaq Mallik, the group had earlier sought permission from the police to organise the protest but was denied on certain grounds. The JAC said that they would go ahead with the demonstration at Dharna Chowk from 2 pm to 5 pm. Memebers had previously led the city's anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protests at the same location.
Meanwhile, the second protest is scheduled for June 1 and will be led by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), a pan-India body comprising Islamic scholars, legal experts, and professionals. As part of its nationwide outreach, the AIMPLB has been conducting public meetings to raise awareness about what it perceives as a negative ripple effect of the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025. In Hyderabad, the Board recently held a protest meeting at Darussalam, the headquarters of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM). It also recently organised a Lights Off protest and a human chain, both symbolic protests against the new waqf legislation.
Both the JAC and AIMPLB have expressed confidence in mobilising large crowds in opposition to the new Act. Both protests will take place at Dharna Chowk.
However, there have been murmurs, that both groups are not on the same page. Efforts to organise a single protest on one day have not been successful. There are indications that this could be due to disagreements of a political nature. The AIMPLB team, speaking to the media, pointed out that that their demonstration is scheduled for June 1. Both groups have urged the public to attend the demonstration in large numbers.
The Waqf legislation has drawn criticism from various Muslim organisations and INDIA alliance leaders who maintained that it is likely that the Bharatiya Janata Party would snatch waqf properties from the control of Muslims. The Act undermines the purpose and spirit of waqf .
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Vidarbha's Future Must Be Regional & Inclusive, Not Nagpur-Centric: Gadkari
1 2 3 4 Nagpur: Union minister Nitin Gadkari called for a comprehensive and balanced approach to Vidarbha's industrial growth, urging sector-wise planning, modernisation, and inclusive policies that reach down to the grassroots level. Speaking at the formal release of the 'Advantage Vidarbha – 2025' report on Saturday, the city MP emphasised that development must be region-wide, leveraging the strengths of each district to unlock Vidarbha's full potential. The event was organised by Association for Industrial Development (AID). "Vidarbha's development should not be confined to one city. We need to tap the unique strengths and resources of each district, from textiles in Amravati to the silk and handloom industries in Dhapewada," Gadkari said. He cited the launch of a new non-profit textile firm in Dhapewada that employs over 1,500 women and outlined plans to introduce electric looms to create further employment opportunities in rural areas. The BJP heavyweight minister underscored the importance of integrating agriculture, handicrafts, and the service sector to build a stronger industrial ecosystem. Drawing from his personal farming experience, Gadkari shared how he cultivated organic onions on leased land, marketing organic produce like residue-free tur and highlighting the economic benefits of organic farming. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Undo "Such small-scale, innovative approaches can lift farmers from extreme poverty and prevent them from committing suicides," he said. Gadkari also highlighted emerging opportunities in the textile sector, noting that Amravati can emerge as a leading textile hub of the region. "We must integrate technology and automation in textile printing and production to empower rural artisans and connect them to national and global markets," he stated. Mentioning his discussions with Jindal for establishing steel plants in the region, Gadkari said, "We must build supporting infrastructure, including hotels. At the upcoming agro-convention centre, we are planning to have a 350-room five-star hotel and conference facilities to complement the industrial ecosystem." While unveiling the booklet 'Startup Connect – 2025,' the minister described startups as "a powerful idea with strong potential to transform Vidarbha's economy" and recounted his experiences at various workshops, including one at Dhapewada on Friday that focused on organic farming and soil carbon content. The event saw a host of dignitaries, including former MP Ajay Sancheti, SBI deputy general manager Rajesh Saurabh, IIM director Bhimraya Metri, MSME dept director Rajesh Shirsat, AID president Ashish Kale, vice-president Girdhari Mantri, secretary Vijay Sharma, founder of Fluid Ventures Amit Singal, AID startup convenor Shashikant Chaudhary, and AID office bearers Rajesh Bagdi and Prashant Ugemuge. BOX Call for Women's Wing in AID Gains Momentum Responding to her felicitation at the Advantage Vidarbha event, entrepreneur Supriya Kurve expressed gratitude to Union minister Nitin Gadkari and the AID team, crediting their encouragement for helping her business achieve a Rs2.5 crore turnover. She proposed expanding Advantage Vidarbha to a 4-day conclave to provide deeper exposure to aspiring entrepreneurs. Kurve also advocated for the creation of a dedicated women's wing within the AID to support and mentor women-led enterprises in Vidarbha. Kale credited the visionary leadership of Gadkari and Fadnavis, and the active involvement of the MSME department for transforming Advantage Vidarbha into a major industrial movement.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Delhi HC bins plea against demolition of tenements of Hindu refugees from Pakistan
The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea seeking a stay on the proposed demolition of an illegal colony set up by Hindu refugees from Pakistan along the Yamuna river in north Delhi till an alternative plot of land is allotted to the affected people. The court also vacated an interim stay it had granted on March 12 against the demolition. Justice Dharmesh Sharma on Friday rejected the plea filed by a man named Ravi Ranjan Singh, seeking orders to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to allot the refugees a different spot in the city as per the provisions in the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015, before demolishing their tenements. Mr. Singh argued that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) was framed with the idea of providing Indian citizenship to non-Muslim refugees from the neighbouring countries, to help them escape religious persecution. 'Must be a citizen' However, the court said that it 'has no hesitation in holding that the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs sought by way of the present petition' because to be eligible to avail of the provisions of the Delhi government policy, the person seeking relief 'must first and foremost be a citizen of India'. 'On account of their nationality, the Pakistani refugees cannot be rehabilitated under the DUSIB policy,' it added. The court asked the petitioner, as well as the other refugees, to first acquire Indian citizenship, adding that it could 'be done online with ease' and asked the Delhi State Legal Service Authority to help the refugees to comply with the necessary legal formalities. Remarks against Centre The court added that 'even Indian citizens cannot claim alternate allotment as an absolute right, particularly in cases where the land they occupy falls under specially prohibited areas like Zone 'O' of Delhi, i.e., the Yamuna floodplains'. Justice Sharma also made observations regarding the court's attempts to engage with the concerned authorities to facilitate the rehabilitation and relocation of the refugees, saying all its 'efforts have been unfruitful, seemingly due to the classic case of bureaucratic buck-passing, particularly on the part of the Union of India'. The judge added, 'Nevertheless, this court cannot undertake the exercise of framing a policy to ameliorate the plight of the refugees.'
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
HC junks plea seeking SIT, aid for ‘persecution of tribal Christians'
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by 20 petitioners, primarily from the Tribal Christian community, who alleged systematic communal violence, displacement, and destruction of property against them in villages across Sukma district. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The petitioners sought setting up a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the cases, a commission of inquiry and compensation. A division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru ruled that the mentioned reliefs sought under the Act, 1952, could not be directed in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners claimed they were subjected to targeted communal violence, including assaults, displacement, destruction of homes and property, sacrilege of religious materials, and threats to their life and liberty for practising Christianity. They alleged that despite repeated oral and written complaints, police and administrative authorities failed to register FIRs, provide protection, conduct fair investigations, or rehabilitate victims. They said that some officials even refused to acknowledge their complaints or rebuked the petitioners for their faith. Sanbha Rumnong and Samuel David, counsels for the petitioners, presented the case. R S Marhas, additional advocate general, appearing for the state, submitted that an FIR was already registered for one of the incidents reported by some petitioners, and the matter was under investigation. The additional advocate general argued that the petition, seeking multiple reliefs, was not maintainable under Article 226 for 'demands'. He added that if the petitioners' grievance was specifically about the non-registration of an FIR concerning an incident on April 24, 2025, they should pursue remedies available under law. He cited the Allahabad High Court's decision in Waseem Haider vs. State of UP (2020), which dismissed a similar petition. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court, after hearing arguments at length, found no grounds to interfere with the petition and dismissed it, granting the petitioners liberty to approach appropriate forums for redressal of their grievances. Consequently, all pending interlocutory applications were disposed of. Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by 20 petitioners, primarily from the Tribal Christian community, who alleged systematic communal violence, displacement, and destruction of property against them in villages across Sukma district. The petitioners sought setting up a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the cases, a commission of inquiry and compensation. A division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru ruled that the mentioned reliefs sought under the Act, 1952, could not be directed in a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners claimed they were subjected to targeted communal violence, including assaults, displacement, destruction of homes and property, sacrilege of religious materials, and threats to their life and liberty for practising Christianity. They alleged that despite repeated oral and written complaints, police and administrative authorities failed to register FIRs, provide protection, conduct fair investigations, or rehabilitate victims. They said that some officials even refused to acknowledge their complaints or rebuked the petitioners for their faith. Sanbha Rumnong and Samuel David, counsels for the petitioners, presented the case. R S Marhas, additional advocate general, appearing for the state, submitted that an FIR was already registered for one of the incidents reported by some petitioners, and the matter was under investigation. The additional advocate general argued that the petition, seeking multiple reliefs, was not maintainable under Article 226 for 'demands'. He added that if the petitioners' grievance was specifically about the non-registration of an FIR concerning an incident on April 24, 2025, they should pursue remedies available under law. He cited the Allahabad High Court's decision in Waseem Haider vs. State of UP (2020), which dismissed a similar petition. The court, after hearing arguments at length, found no grounds to interfere with the petition and dismissed it, granting the petitioners liberty to approach appropriate forums for redressal of their grievances. Consequently, all pending interlocutory applications were disposed of.
