Waqf violent protest: On a tough legal wicket, TMC faces a delicate balancing act | India News

“People I know are getting divided into Hindu-Muslim right in front of my eyes,” lamented Debangshu Bhattacharya, the young TMC leader who popularized the iconic Khela Hobe slogan. When the youth gets disheartened, it is obvious that the situation is dire. Debangshu’s Facebook post came on the backdrop of three deaths in violent protests in West Bengal’s Murshidabad over the Waqf Amendment Act. The violence that erupted on Friday, 11th April continued well into Saturday, prompting the Calcutta High Court to order central forces to be stationed in sensitive areas. With conspiracy theories swirling and familiar script of blame game playing out, an emotive issue has once again engulfed sensitive Indo-Bangladesh border districts. The assembly elections are just a year away, and the government is already battling high-profile scams—including the teacher recruitment controversy— in such a situation the political ramifications of such a livewire issue cannot be ignored.
What sparked the outrage?
The Union Government’s decision to amend the Waqf Act of 1995 has ruffled feathers of sections of the minority community. Waqf refers to properties donated for charitable purposes. These properties, which cannot be sold, are overseen by a mutawalli (custodian). Several clauses in the new Waqf Amendment Act—renamed the UMEED Act—haven’t gone down well. These include the abolition of “Waqf by user,” inclusion of non-Muslims on Waqf Boards, a new requirement that donors must be practicing Muslims for at least five years and must own the property, provision to appeal tribunal orders in the High Court, and the formation of separate boards for different sects.
West Bengal, which has over 80,480 Waqf properties—second only to Uttar Pradesh’s 2.2 lakh—has witnessed widespread protests. Nationally, Waqf Boards control 39 lakh acres of land, with 21 lakh acres added between 2013 and 2025, a figure the Union Home Minister claimed reflects past misuse. According to Amit Shah, speaking in the Parliament, the 2013 amendments were politically motivated, and the current changes aim to rectify that.
Timeline of the protests
The protests began sporadically but escalated violently on 11th April. Prior to that, a viral video showing a Kolkata bus driver being forced to remove a saffron flag under pressure from Waqf protesters had already sparked controversy.

Additionally BJP had shared a clip where State Minister Siddiqullah Chowdhury, also the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hindi leader, was heard allegedly claiming that his supporters can easily choke Kolkata if required.

Preempting unrest, Mamata Banerjee had made her stance clear on April 9, just a day after mobs attacked a police van in Jangipur, Murshidabad. “You have been hurt. Have faith. Nothing in Bengal will divide us. We must live and let live,” Mamata said in an outreach to the minority community. Outlining the historical significance of the Muslim community in the state, she pledged to give them steadfast support. However, it failed to soothe frayed nerves. Just a couple of days later, violence erupted in Samsherganj, Dhulian, and Suti of Murshidabad, leading to the deaths of three people, including a father and son.
On the 12th, West Bengal CM gave out a measured message amidst news of violence. Without mentioning the Waqf Act or the Muslim community, she asked for calm and claimed that the legislation wouldn’t be implemented in the state. She wondered why riots were being instigated. Mamata claimed that some political parties were trying to use this issue to further their agenda and requested people not to fall into their trap.
Legal experts weigh in
While Mamata may have promised that the Waqf Act won’t be implemented in the state, experts are divided over the constitutional validity of such a claim. Former Supreme Court Justice Ashok Kumar Ganguly, when contacted by TOI Online, said that what Mamata Banerjee is saying is ‘unconstitutional.’ According to the former justice, the CM has the right to move the Supreme Court but, until the court gives an order, the state has to obey the law passed by the Union Government. He cited Article 256 of the Constitution, which mandates, “executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament….” Hence, Mamata Banerjee has limited scope to not cooperate with the Union government, he argued. This view is also seconded by eminent lawyer and Rajya Sabha member from CPIM, Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya. Bikash, who has just had a major legal victory over the state government in the SSC case—which led to 26,000 teachers losing their jobs—virtually laughed off CM’s claim. He believes it was an irresponsible statement and didn’t help cool tempers. According to Bikash, this was an issue that required community protest and not state government intervention.
Practising Advocate in the Supreme Court, Nikhil Mehra had a more nuanced take. He told TOI Online that Mamata Banerjee may choose not to operationalise the Waqf Amendment Act. However, he laid out certain conditions—such as in cases where Waqf has acquired properties belonging to the central government, the state would have no authority if those properties are reclaimed. He emphasised that the law remains in force even if the state chooses not to operationalise it, and in the event of a change in regime, the incoming government would be in a position to enforce all its provisions effectively from the day it was signed by the President.
In cases of land disputes, if the state is made a party, it raises the question of whether it can legally oppose the matter in court on the ground that the state will not enforce the Act, Advocate Mehra noted. He added that for Acts falling under the Concurrent List, a state can pass a contrary amendment—but only if it receives the President’s assent. West Bengal hasn’t even attempted this because the President is unlikely to accept such an amendment.
Perspectives from the Muslim community
Beyond legalities, Banga Bhushan winner author Abul Bashar offered a cultural explanation, noting that donating to Waqf often serves as a workaround to the complexities of inheritance law. He defended Waqf Boards as essential support systems for widows, orphans, and the economically disadvantaged. While he endorsed peaceful protests, he warned against violence and urged Hindus to stand in solidarity. Bashar maintained that the protest is genuine and grounded in Islamic tenets
Educationist Miratun Nahar, when contacted, minced no words and said those who want to change the secular nature of the country have brought this act in a well-crafted and well-planned manner. For members of the Waqf Board, her appeal is to look for the welfare of the Board, the community, and the nation overall and not to fall into the trap of those who want to provoke. However, the veteran educationist reposed little faith in the politics of Mamata Banerjee and said that trusting her would be even more detrimental for the community.
The political kerfuffle
Trust, though, as a product, seems to be in short supply in West Bengal’s politics. Days after the state government took BSF’s help to get the situation under control, TMC spokesperson Kunal Ghosh made an outlandish claim in a press conference that some people may well have used BSF and other central agencies to bring ‘outsiders’ to foment communal tension in Murshidabad. Claiming to have received reports, Kunal Ghosh demanded a high-level probe to verify them. Despite over 150 arrests, the identity of the mastermind behind the riots remains unclear. The BSF has gone on record saying that petrol bombs were hurled towards them.
According to BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari‘s post on X, the elected lawmakers of TMC—who have won by ‘rigging’—have no agency, and hence the entire hardline forces in Murshidabad and Malda have shifted allegiance to PFI, SIMI, and ABT. The Leader of Opposition also gleefully shared an undated video on X where a Muslim individual is claiming that the community is not dependent on Mamata, but Didi (Mamata) is dependent on them for her political survival!

Adhikari, who believes that CM should resign and elections should be held under President’s Rule, has claimed that people from riot-affected Dhulian have crossed over to Baishnabnagar, Malda, fearing what he claims is ‘religious persecution.’
Incidentally, TMC MP from Jangipur, Khalilur Rahaman, and Manirul Islam, MLA from Farakka, both have failed to pinpoint groups who were behind the attacks. Islam’s house was attacked and ransacked in this violence. His family members had to take refuge elsewhere. Claiming that the police couldn’t provide him security, Islam, like his colleague Khalilur, said that young boys were at the forefront of the attack. “If elected representatives are not safe, how can the common man be provided protection?” he told local media personnels.
Union Minister Sukanta Majumdar has upped the ante, claiming on X that what is being witnessed is “Noakhali part 2,” a reference to pre-partition horrors. TMC, on its part, has gone into overdrive on social media, claiming that BJP is using fake images and videos to discredit the Mamata government and also to further divide society along communal lines.

It is also highlighting the fact that violence has also erupted in Tripura over the Waqf protest, where BJP is in power. The saffron party in its part has cited the example of Assam with 40% minority where things have remained calm.
What’s at stake
What’s getting lost in this political mudslinging is the fact that Murshidabad is a district with 66.67% Muslim population according to the 2011 Census. The nearby district of Malda too has a Muslim population of over 50%. Both are districts bordering Bangladesh already witnessing political upheaval. Thus, discontent regarding the Waqf Act, if not tempered quickly, may continue to fester for long in these communally sensitive districts. The fact that TMC has not been traditionally strong here, only grabbing political power in recent years, makes Mamata’s job even more tricky. TMC organisation isn’t particularly robust with many of the leaders’ turncoats from other parties. The party will look to ensure that Muslims, who have been their dedicated voter base for over a decade in the state, don’t look for other options while also assuaging the sentiments of the majority Hindu community. That’s the delicate balancing act Mamata led government has to do in the run up to the elections. The BJP will be itching to use incidents like Waqf riots to earn the confidence of the Hindu community, who so far have partially reposed faith in the Mamata government mainly due to its welfare schemes.
All eyes are currently on April 16, when the CM is set to meet Muslim clerics to figure out a roadmap. On the same day, the Supreme Court will take up the Waqf case for hearing. A possible breakthrough on either front can cool down the temperature. Else, people of Bengal may have to brace for a heated political summer!