India's Home Minister Amit Shah Tables Bills in Lok Sabha to Disqualify Jailed Ministers After 30 Days in Custody
India's Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday introduced three bills in the Lok Sabha that seek to disqualify the Prime Minister, Union ministers, Chief Ministers or State and Union Territory ministers who remain in judicial custody for 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges.
 |
| Image Source: Daily Excelsior on X |
The proposed legislation states that if any elected office-bearer is in custody for 30 straight days in connection with offences carrying a punishment of five years or more, they will automatically cease to hold office on the 31st day.
Shah also moved a motion to refer the bills to a joint parliamentary committee for further discussion.
Introducing the legislation, Shah stated that it would now be for the people of India to decide whether it is acceptable for someone in custody to continue governing.
He said the initiative reflects the government’s commitment to raising the standard of political morality and holding constitutional authorities accountable.
The Constitution Amendment Bill seeks to amend Articles 75, 164 and 239AA to provide a uniform framework for disqualifying Union and State ministers, including those serving in Delhi.
The amendments to the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 aim to align those laws with the same standard, allowing for the removal of ministers under judicial custody for grave charges.
The introduction of the bills drew sharp criticism from opposition parties.
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi compared the move to medieval autocracy, alleging that the government could misuse investigative agencies to eliminate elected leaders.
“We are going back to medieval times when the king could just remove anybody at will,” Gandhi said, claiming the bill undermines the principle of democracy.
RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav alleged that the bills were politically motivated and aimed at pressuring Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. He claimed the move was designed to force the JD(U) to accommodate BJP interests in seat-sharing.
AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi opposed the introduction of the bills, warning that they violate the principle of separation of powers and enable executive overreach.
“This government is hell-bent on creating a Police State,” he said, adding that the amendments give undue power to executive agencies.
Responding to the backlash, Shah argued that the legislation places even the Prime Minister under the ambit of the law and contrasts it with what he described as the Opposition’s desire to "run governments from jail."
In a series of posts in Hindi, Shah said, “Now, the people of the country will have to decide whether it is appropriate for a minister, chief minister or the prime minister to run the government while in jail.”
BJP leaders defended the bills and condemned the opposition’s behaviour in Parliament. Anurag Thakur said that the unruly scenes were a deliberate attempt to obstruct a moral reform in governance.
Sambit Patra called the opposition’s actions unprecedented, saying they marked a dark chapter in the history of Parliament.
The development comes in the backdrop of high-profile arrests such as that of Delhi’s former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Tamil Nadu minister V Senthil Balaji, both of whom continued to hold office after being taken into custody.
The government maintains that the proposed legal framework seeks to address such gaps by ensuring that ministers in custody do not continue to exercise executive authority.