Asaduddin Owaisi, head of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), who is often in the headlines due to his statements, expressed his opinion against Waqf Act, Bihar Assembly Elections, Cricket Match with Pakistan and Assam BJP in an interview. He raised many serious questions about the policies and alleged discrimination of the government.

Owaisi’s disputed statement on Waqf law
Owaisi attacked the central government fiercely over the Waqf law. He said that through Waqf law, the government is occupying the property of Muslims. He clarified that ‘Modi ji will not decide how long your beard will be, whether you have to offer Namaz, or not, it is a matter of privacy, it is wrong for the government to interfere in it.’

Owaisi questioned whether a Hindu member will ever be made in the Gurdwara Management Committee? And those who come from government nomination, will they protect Waqf property? He warned that if this continues in this way, Muslims will lose their mosque tomorrow.

Owaisi’s eye on Bihar assembly elections
Owaisi also made a strong comment about the Bihar assembly elections. He said that the people of Seemanchal want change and this area is troubled by corruption. He alleged that local leader Akhtarul Iman had written a letter to Lalu Yadav and sought only 6 seats. Owaisi clarified that the government has distracted people’s attention by making an issue of intruders in Seemanchal.

Owaisi’s statement on cricket match with Pakistan
Owaisi took a very sharp stand on the cricket match with Pakistan. He said, ‘These are wrestlers who cannot stop cricket matches, playing matches with Pakistan is the weakness of the government.’ He raised the question that people cannot go to the holy places of Kartarpur and Nankana Sahib, but the government is trying to earn financial benefits by playing cricket matches with Pakistan. Owaisi warned that if this match is not played, then Lashkar who is trying to open a new camp again, would have a strict message to him.

Strict opposition to Assam BJP’s tweet
Owaisi also reacted to Assam BJP’s X post. He said, ‘This is his job, spreading poison in society, spreading hatred against Muslims.’ He completely rejected the move, calling it communalism.

The Supreme Court will order on Monday (September 15, 2025) on the Waqf Amendment Act case. The court reserved the order on 22 May on the issue of interim relief in the case. The bench of Chief Justice BR Gawai and Augustin George Christ heard for 3 consecutive days.

During the hearing, the court had told the petitioners that the law made from Parliament is considered constitutional till the final decision is taken. A very strong base will be required to stop its provisions.

Opposition to things like preventing Waqf Board from claiming

The petitioner side has opposed things such as making the registration of Waqf by user mandatory, in the dispute of the Waqf Board with the government, to be in the hands of a government official, to make non -Muslims members members in the Waqf Board, the possibility of religious activity in ancient monuments, the condition of being a Muslim for 5 years and the Waqf Board on the tribal land to stop the Waqf Board. They have been described as discrimination from Muslims and interference in religious matters.

On the other hand, the Central Government cited the law to enact a law after following the entire process on behalf of Parliament. The Center said that it would not be right to stop the sections of the law before the final hearing. Those who have brought the petition here are not personally affected. He is not a representative of the entire Muslim community. The law has been made in public interest. The discrepancies of the old Waqf law have been removed.

This condition placed for waqf

The government said that Waqf is not an essential part of Islam. It cannot be given the status like fundamental rights. The registration of Waqf by user was also kept necessary in the 1923 law. People who have not registered for 102 years, are still protesting. If the property is not their, then it should be used in social interest.

The Center also argued that earlier only Muslims could do Waqf, but in 2013, the provision of the property of non -Muslims was also made. To improve this, a condition has been laid for at least 5 years to be a Muslim. Constitution also gives protection to the land of tribals.

Indication of prohibiting law provisions

Limited members in the Waqf Board will be non -Muslims, whose role will also be very limited. There will be no difference from new Waqf law on religious activities in ancient monuments. It should be noted that during the initial hearing of the case, the bench headed by the then Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna had indicated to stop some provisions of the law, but on April 17, the central government itself assured the court that there would be no appointment in the Waqf Board or Waqf Council at present.

Also, registered or declared Waqf by user (Waqf) properties will not be denotified. Now the order of the court will decide whether the Waqf Amendment Act will be fully applicable or not.

Also read:- Employee provoked with being fired from job in Hyderabad

The case of the inauguration plaque with the state mark in the Hazratbal Dargah has heated the politics of Jammu and Kashmir. PDP President Mehbooba Mufti demanded strict action against the Waqf Board and its chief, calling the incident deep on the religious sentiments of Muslims. At the same time, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah also raised the question and said that there was no need to put a government symbol at the religious place.

Mehbooba Mufti attacked Waqf Board

Mehbooba Mufti directly called Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah to suspend the Waqf Board immediately and later dissolve it and restruct it. He said that the use of state symbol at a holy site like Hazratbal Dargah is completely inappropriate.

Mehbooba said, “Instead of taking action against those who spoil the symbol due to religious sentiments, the government should file an FIR against the chairman of the Waqf Board and the members who allowed to do so. Hazratbal is a religious place, not the coronation or the site of political symbolism.”

Demand for action under Section 295-A

The PDP president connected the matter to Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code. This stream is related to the intention taken with the intention of hurting religious sentiments. Mehbooba said that the Waqf Board is responsible in this case and legal action should be taken against it.

Mehbooba Mufti strongly criticized the Waqf Board Chairman Darkhshan Andrabi. He said that it is completely wrong to demand PSA on plaque breakers.

Mehbooba said, “It is unacceptable to urge the Home Minister of India to apply PSA on local people. The real question is, who allowed to put a logo on a shrine where there is no idea of ​​idol worship.”

He said, “It was not a BJP program. Unfortunately, Hazratbal’s sanctity was compromised in this way. If the current board still continues to work, then such actions affected by the BJP’s anti-Muslim ideology will keep hurting the sentiments of Muslims.”

‘Why symbol at the religious place?’- Omar Abdullah

Chief Minister Omar Abdullah also presented his side on this dispute. He said that government symbols are never used at religious places nor has any tradition.

Omar Abdullah said, “The first question is whether the symbol should have engraved the foundation stone. I have never seen this symbol being used in any religious program. So why was the need to apply it on the stone of Hazratbal Shrine? What was the need to put the stone? Wasn’t it just enough to work? Hazratbal Shrine was given this form by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah. Did he put such a stone somewhere?”

He said, “People remember the work of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, even if they have not put any stone for themselves. Government symbols are used only in government programs. Mosques, dargahs, temples, temples, gurudwaras are not government places, these are religious places. Government symbols are not used there.”

Ed Action on Waqf Board Request: Taking major action in the money laundering case, the ED has returned an amount of Rs 3.82 crore to the Karnataka State Waqf Board. This money was from the Waqf Board, which was wrongly transferred to other accounts through fraud.

The ED conducted this investigation under the ongoing investigation against Sushila Chintamani and others. The case started with an FIR, which was registered against two officers of Vijaya Bank and Syed Siraj Ahmed, an employee of the Waqf Board.

Transferred money in accounts of fake companies

The Waqf Board had given a fixed deposit of about Rs 4 crore through two checks in Vijaya Bank to open a fixed deposit, but instead of opening FD, these money was transferred to the accounts of fake companies. According to the ED, Mercedes cars were purchased from Rs 1.10 crore out of Rs 4 crore and Rs 2.72 crore was transferred to a fake company Ajay Sharma Trading Corporation.

ED returned money to the real entitled

ED tracked the entire money trail of this scam and attached property worth Rs 3.82 crore. After this, on 31 March 2017, ED also filed a charge sheet against 6 people and companies in the court. Under the PMLA law, the ED emphasized that the money which was incorrectly withdrawn, should be returned to its real entitlement.

When the court asked to return the money to the Waqf Board, the ED did not object to this. Finally, on 1 July 2025, ED returned the money to the Waqf Board, CEO Jilani H. Mokashi of the Karnataka State Waqf Board was handed over a banker check of Rs 3.82 crore.

Also read:- ‘India lost a Rafale in Operation Sindoor because …’, CEO of Dassault Aviation rejected Pakistan’s claim

Nishikant dubey on asaduddin owaisi: Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and MP Nishikant Dubey has given a big statement about AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi in an interview given to a YouTube channel. He said that Owaisi is his old friend, but the ideologies of both are completely different, such as two banks of the river, which can never be found.

Unity from Owaisi on national security, differences on other issues
Nishikant Dubey said that “Owaisi and my ideologies are different, but we are united on issues like national security, fear, hunger, poverty and corruption. Owaisi is more aggressive than me on these subjects.” He clarified that both the views on matters like internal issues, especially Waqf Board are completely opposite. While Owaisi advocates for giving special rights to the Muslim community, Dubey calls himself a pouring opponent.

Reaction to ‘Jai Palestine’ slogan

In the interview, when he was asked that Owaisi gave the slogan of ‘Jai Palestine, Jai Bhima’ during the swearing -in and now he has changed his perception towards Owaisi? On this, Dubey said that it was unfair during the oath to say “Jai Palestine”, he should not have said so. However, he also added that the Government of India recognizes ‘Two Nation Theory’ since 1948, in which both Israel and Palestine are different countries. He made it clear that India is opposed to Hamas, not Palestine.

Friendship continues despite political differences

Nishikant Dubey said that his friendship with Owaisi is already and still persists, but there is a big difference in ideology. He said that “The difference is that Owaisi does Pro-Muslim politics and the aggression in it is uncomfortable many times.” He further said that he and Owaisi can never agree on issues like internal affairs like Waqf Board or Muslim Reservation.

Both leaders stayed together in foreign tour

During the interview, when he was asked that he and Owaisi were together in a foreign delegation recently, what is the relationship? To this, Dubey replied, “I already said, both of us are completely unanimous on issues like national security. Owaisi is more vocal than me there. We both stand together on such issues.”

The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition of the Delhi Waqf Board filed for a gurdwara in the martyrdom of Delhi. The court says that when there is already a religious structure there, then let it be. The Waqf Board had filed this petition challenging the 2010 decision of the Delhi High Court, in which the High Court had ruled in favor of the defendant. The defendant says that this land was sold to him in the year 1953.

Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma were hearing the bench case. The bench told the Waqf Board that they should withdraw their claim on their own. On behalf of the petitioner, Senior Advocate Sanjay Ghosh said that the Delhi High Court had also admitted that there was a mosque, but now there is some kind of gurudwara. On this, the court told the lawyer that there is no kind, there is a proper gurdwara.

Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said, ‘There is a gurudwara on that land, which is also functioning. When there is a gurudwara, let him live. If a religious structure is already there, then you should withdraw your claim yourself.

The Waqf Board told the Supreme Court that there was a mosque named Babbar Shah at the disputed site. He said that this mosque was present since time immemorial and was dedicated to religious objectives. However, the defendant claims that in 1953, the disputed property was sold to him by his owner Mohammad Ehsan. In 2010, the Delhi High Court also ruled in favor of the defendant.

The High Court had said in its judgment that the defendant was occupied since 1947-48. It is also true that the defendant could not present any documents as the owner for the purchase of property, but the Waqf Board will not benefit. The court had said that if the board wants possession, then it will have to establish its case and present the documents.

Review is going on in the Supreme Court regarding the Waqf Amendment Act 2025. But the remarks made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey about the judiciary on Saturday remains the subject of controversy. Nishikant Dubey said that the Supreme Court is going out of its limits and listening to the decision. He is ignoring the Parliament of the country. He also said that the only purpose of the country’s court is to show the face, I will tell the law. If the Supreme Court has to give a decision in all cases, then Parliament and Legislative Assembly should be closed. Apart from this, he has said many other things.

In such a case, it is necessary to know that if rhetoric is made against the Supreme Court, then how can one get a punishment in such a case.

Rhetoric against Supreme Court by staying in limits

The answer is yes, rhetoric can be made against the Supreme Court, but there are some limitations about it. Under Article 19 of the Constitution, every citizen has gained freedom of expression, but this freedom is not complete. For example, inflammatory speech or derogatory rhetoric cannot be made. It is legally banned and legal action can also be taken regarding this. The Constitution of India gives people freedom of expression, including rhetoric on the decision of the Supreme Court.

Legal action can be taken

However, people do not get this freedom completely, because some restrictions have been imposed in Article 19 (2) of the Constitution. Legal action can be taken against him if a person makes inflammatory statements against the Supreme Court or if he provokes a public system or provokes people against a particular community. Action can also be taken against the Supreme Court on making derogatory statements. Especially when the court is contempt or is damaging the reputation of the judges.

Criticizing the decision of the Supreme Court is a democratic right, but criticism should be appropriate and creative. If that criticism is derogatory, false or provocative, then it can be punished for it.

Also read: Can polio spread from Pakistan to India, know where this virus is present in the world now?

Supreme Court on Waqf Act: While hearing the petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, the Supreme Court today asked the Center strict questions on the provisions of many provisions of the new law, especially the provisions of Waqf by user properties. The court also questioned the provision to include non-Muslims in the Central Waqf Parishad and asked the government whether it would allow Muslims to be part of the Hindu board.

‘Waqf board should be Muslim members in addition to ex -officio officials’

The court has commented that the Waqf Board should have a Muslim member besides X officials members, which was opposed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. The Supreme Court has not issued any order today. He says that the term of any board is not ending yet. Such an order should not be given by hearing PIL petitions. No Waqf Board has come here. On Thursday (17 April 2025) at 2 pm, the matter will be heard again.

Initially, the Chief Justice told the petitioners that two questions should be considered. First, will the Supreme Court send petitions to the High Court and which points do the petitioners want to debate? Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners, said that many provisions in the new law violate Article 26 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of management of religious affairs.

Sibal raised questions on the power given to the collector

Sibal also questioned the powers given to the Collector with the new law. He argued that the Collector is a part of the government and if he plays the role of Justice, it is unconstitutional. Kapil Sibal said, “Waqf by user is an integral part of Islam. The problem is that if the Waqf was made 3,000 years ago, they will ask for his document.”

When the hearing was about to end in the Supreme Court, the court indicated that it is going to give two orders, as long as the hearing is pending. The Waqf Board should have all Muslims except the X official member. The biggest concern of those who oppose the Waqf law is that the Waqf Bike user who is not register will be denotified, that is, it will not remain the Waqf. On this, the Supreme Court said that as long as the hearing is pending, the government will not do any such work.

Court also expressed concern about Waqf by user

Muslim side lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi told the court that 4 lakhs of 8 lakh Waqf properties will go like this. Intervening on this, the Chief Justice said, “We have been told that the Delhi High Court is built on Waqf land. We are not saying that all Waqf bye users are wrong, but real worrisome.”

Pakistan-bangladesh: The ongoing protest against Waqf Amendment Act in Murshidabad, West Bengal, took violent form. During this time the Hindu community was targeted and there was heavy violence and arson. Many people lost their lives in this violence and many people were injured. After the situation deteriorated, many families there started leaving their house due to fear.

Now a big disclosure has been made in the intelligence report in this case. The report said that Bangladeshi terrorists were involved in this violence in Murshidabad. Meanwhile, after the matter of being associated with Bangladesh terrorist organizations in Murshidabad violence, now Pakistan’s Foreign Minister is on a visit to Dhaka (Bangladesh). A few weeks before this, officials of the Pakistani Army and Intelligence Agency ISI also visited Bangladesh.

Foreign Secretary Amman Baloch will talk to Jasimuddin

After about 15 years, Bangladesh and Pakistan are once again preparing to hold Foreign Secretary-tactical talks (FOC) in Dhaka on Thursday. Foreign Secretary Ammana Baloch will participate in this meeting on behalf of Pakistan, who will reach Dhaka on Wednesday and lead the delegation of her country.

Advisor (Minister) of the Ministry of External Affairs Jasimuddin will participate in the conversation on behalf of Bangladesh. Both countries have not yet made public the agenda of negotiation, but speculations are being made that this meeting may be about mutual cooperation and strategy against India.

There was a big disclosure in intelligence report

According to the PTI report, some sources have said that there has been a big disclosure in the information received by intelligence agencies. According to the report, two Bangladesh or terrorist organizations Jamaat-ul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) and Ansarullah Bangla Team (ABT) were allegedly involved in violence in Murshidabad, West Bengal. Sources say that the violence was done by some criminals from Bangladesh and they also got the support of some leaders of a local political party.

Home Ministry’s eye on the situation in Murshidabad

Violence erupted in areas like Sati, Dhulian and Jangipur in Murshidabad district of West Bengal last Friday and Saturday. At least three people died in this violence. A large number of BSF, CRPF, State Police and RAF personnel have been deployed in Jangipur, Dhulian, Sati and Shamsherganj to control the situation.

According to officials, now the situation is gradually becoming normal. The Union Home Ministry is also constantly monitoring the situation in Murshidabad. Along with this, BSF has been instructed to increase vigil on the Indo-Bangladesh border, so that no illegal infiltration can be done.

Mohammad tawhindi on waqf board: An Imam of the United Arab Emirates has now made a big statement on the ongoing dispute over the Waqf Board Bill in India, which surprised everyone. Mohammad Tauhidi, a governing member of the Global Imam Council (GIC), has given an important advice to the Indian Muslims regarding the Waqf Board.

Mohammad Tauhidi said that the government’s monitoring is necessary on the Waqf Board. He also said that the Waqf Board should not only be for Muslims but it should also be used for Hindus, people of other religions and also for the whole humanity.

‘UAE’s Waqf Board is an ideal example’

Mohammad Tauhidi said, “I believe that the Waqf Board should focus on the service of Islam, Muslims, society and the whole humanity, as we have done in the UAE.” He said that the most important thing is that religious institutions should work for the good of society, following the law, with positive thinking.

Tauheedi said that Waqf Board in the UAE works completely in a professional manner. They are legally strong, they get great respect in society, and these boards operate the country’s Muslim religious structure better in different parts. He said, “I think the UAE’s Waqf Board can be a role model (ideal) for Muslims from Muslim countries and countries like India.

‘Waqf board not just for Muslims’

Advising Indian Muslims, Mohammad Tauheedi said that UAE has set a good example for all religions and religious places in his country, which can become a role model for Muslims all over the world.

He said that the Waqf Board is not only for Muslims, but it is also done for temples, churches and other places of worship. All these are given security and respect under the law. The government takes care of them and serves them. Tauheedi clearly said that it is necessary to monitor all these, but no one is seen in a special or different way. There are similar laws for all and all should follow them.