On August 20, 2025, Minister of Home Affairs Amit Shah introduced the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025 in Parliament. Consequently, The bill represents a bold and contentious step in the history of the Constitution of India, as it looks to bring a measure of political accountability. The Bill proposes that if the Prime Minister, a Chief Minister, or any other minister spends 30 consecutive days in custody for serious crimes, they will automatically lose office even without a formal conviction.
As a result, the introduction of the bill has ignited strong national debate. Proponents laud it as a blunt measure necessary to obfuscate the criminalization of politics and rebuild popular trust in politics. On the other hand, critics of the measure argue it goes against the presumption of innocence and opens political loopholes for the misuse of investigatory agencies to upset opposition governments.
This debate takes on even more significance by examining recent political events, especially the arrest of Delhi’s former Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal under the excise policy case, which had already raised questions about the real practical and ethical ramifications of a governing authority operating under custody, which makes the bill even timelier.
The One Hundred and Thirtieth Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025 (Bill) was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 20th August 2025. The most significant proposal in the Bill is the automatic eviction from office of a Prime Minister, State Chief Minister, or any Ministers both at the Centre or in State governments, if the Prime Minister, State Chief Minister, or any minister face arrest, are in custody in connection with a serious criminal offence for a prolonged period. The Bill further extends the similar framework to Union Territory of Delhi. Similarly, the government proposes to introduce parallel legislations of the Bill in Puducherry and Jammu & Kashmir.
A Minister shall cease to hold office if:
The government may re-induct the same leader into the Cabinet or as PM/CM once he or she is released from custody.
Historically India has struggled with the criminalization of politics. Currently, under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as it currently stands, an elected representative may only be disqualified after they are convicted of a crime and also, only if they are sentenced to over two years incarceration.
This loophole allows an elected leader to retain office even while facing serious criminal charges, standing trial, or remaining in police custody.
The government draws an analogy with civil services, where officers face automatic suspension upon arrest, regardless of conviction. Minsters, who have more responsibilities under the Constitution do not have the same immediate suspension. The Bill proposes establishing parity in levels of accountability for ministers to civil service.
In another important step forward, the Home Minister indicated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi personally pushed to ensure that the Prime Minister’s office was to fall under the Bill. This shows that the Act covers even the highest offices of the polity, ensuring no exemption for top leaders.
This is the main law that deals with both the disqualification of elected representatives.
Civil servants face immediate suspension once authorities arrest them. Suspension is automatic and without question, it is not even dependent upon a conviction. This is a precautionary principle, i.e., such suspension helps to ensure the integrity of governance while an investigation is occurring.
Moreover, the government argues, if a minister has a greater public duty, they cannot enjoy immunity, which bureaucrats do not have.
Closing the gap post-130th Amendment- The 130th Amendment Bill, 2025 will align elected representatives with the same standards applied to civil servants.Thus, in the gap between civil accountability and administrative accountability, if a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or minister is in judicial custody for 30 days without being released, they will be automatically removed from office.
2.Political Stability versus Rule of Law
Supporters of the bill view it as necessary reform to protect governance from corruption and the abuse of power.
Opposition however contend that it creates a risky precedent because it uses removal from office, before a conviction has been achieved, and this fundamentally can under-cut the presumption of “innocent until proven guilty.”
This tension taps into a central dilemma: Should a minister to be preserved at the expense of individual rights, or should legal protections have priority over political urgency?
3.Precedents and Concerns about Targeting Politically
The opposition argues that the bill could serve as a tool for political weaponization. Since people often accuse central agencies (like the ED or CBI) of acting selectively, many fear that ruling governments may arrange arrests to topple rival state administrations.
Case in Point: Delhi’s Example
Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest in the alleged liquor excise scam exposed a legal loophole—despite being in custody, he remained CM for weeks. The Centre cites this as justification, arguing that “a CM in jail running a government weakens democracy.” Yet, it also raises fears of political misuse, making it a defining precedent behind the 130th Amendment push.
Provided for 33% reservation for women in the Lok sabha and the State Assemblies, which has long been need, to establish gender representation .
Enabled “One Nation, One Election” empowering the Election Commission to synchronize ethical terms of the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.
Other reforms included reservation lists, state reorganization, and representation of states, showing that India has a constantly modifying constitution
The 130th Constitutional Amendment is a watershed moment in the historical relationship between the political need for reform, and constitutional safeguards.
Supporters: It fills a legal loophole, allows for effective and swift accountability of legislators charged with serious criminal offences, and has the potential to re-establish public faith in governance.
Opponents: It has the potential to change into a political weapon, that undermines the rule of law, undermines federalism, and undermines democratic freedoms by punishing political leaders before they are convicted.
In the end, the way lawmakers exercise the amendment and process—either equitably and impartially or with bias—will determine whether people recall it as a valiant reform or a grave constitutional error.
Q1. What is the 130th Amendment Bill, 2025?
The 130th Amendment Bill, 2025 proposes to automatically remove the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and all ministers from office if they are in custody, charged with a serious crime, and remain in custody for more than 30 days.
Q2. Why did they introduce this bill?
They introduced this bill to stop any leaders in police or judicial custody from continuing to hold office, to further enhance accountability, and prevent abuse of power over time.
Q3. Who introduced the bill?
Union Home Minister Amit Shah introduced the Bill to Parliament on August 20, 2025.
Q4. Does the bill extend to Union and State ministers?
Yes, the bill covers Union ministers, state ministers, chief ministers, and even members of the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Q5. Can the minister be reinstalled?
Yes, the minister does not lose office permanently. Once released, the same Prime Minister or Chief Minister can be reinstated in office or similar Cabinet position.
Q6. What about civil servants?
Civil servants are suspended if arrested. The bill seeks to strengthen a similar approach of accountability for politicians.
Q7. What is the opposition to the bill?
Critics raise the concern that the bill could be abused politically to intimidate or target political opponents by
When India was trying to make peace with the earlier imposition of 25% tariff by…
Introduction "Equality before the law is a constitutional guarantee, but do we understand equality as…
Introduction "Be you ever so high, the law is above you." - Lord Denning Article…
"The Constitution is not a mere lawyers’ document, it is a vehicle of life." –…
Introduction A Brain-Computer Interface (BCI), as developed in our research, decodes a person's inner speech—imagined…
The Fundamental Rights provided for in the Indian Constitution is a very important and arguably…
This website uses cookies.