New Delhi (ABC Live): On 20 August 2025, the Government of India introduced the 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha. The Bill proposes that any Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister who remains in custody for 30 consecutive days in a case involving an offence punishable with five years or more must vacate office automatically. Reappointment is allowed after release.

Supporters argue that the 130th Constitutional Amendment ensures accountability. Opponents believe it creates a tool for misuse by investigative agencies. This ABC Live report explains its provisions, case law, criminal data, Kejriwal’s case study, and political impact.

---

Provisions of the 130th Constitutional Amendment

The 130th Constitutional Amendment inserts new clauses into:

• Article 75 (Union): Union Minister in custody ?30 days must be removed by the President on PM’s advice. If not, automatic cessation applies. The PM also falls under this rule.

• Article 164 (States): Similar rule for CMs and State Ministers.

• Article 239AA (Delhi): Automatic cessation also applies to the Chief Minister and ministers of Delhi.

Companion Bills

• Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Puducherry.

• J&K Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025 – Jammu & Kashmir.

---

RPA vs 130th Constitutional Amendment

The 130th Constitutional Amendment, therefore, marks a shift from conviction-based accountability to custody-based accountability.

---

Case Law Context

Several Supreme Court cases frame this debate:

• Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013): Immediate disqualification on conviction ?2 years.

• Manoj Narula (2014): Pending charges not a bar; Parliament must legislate if required.

• Shamsher Singh (1974): The President and Governors are bound by the advice of ministers.

• Nabam Rebia (2016): Limited discretionary powers of Governors.

• Anukul Chandra Pradhan (1997): Persons in custody cannot contest elections.

• Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (2022, PMLA): Stringent bail rules increase the likelihood of 30+ day custody.

---

Criminal Exposure of MPs and MLAs

According to ADR (Association for Democratic Reforms):

• Lok Sabha 2024:

  • 46% (251 of 543 MPs) face criminal cases.

  • 31% (170 MPs) face serious charges punishable by ?5 years.

  • 27 MPs have already been convicted.

• MLAs (2023 study, 4,092 analysed):

  • 45% face criminal charges.

  • 29% face serious charges.

• Overall: 2,556 MPs/MLAs face 4,442 pending criminal cases.

?? The 130th Constitutional Amendment could impact a large share of ministers, given the high criminal exposure.

---

Case Study: Kejriwal’s Arrest

• Event: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal was arrested in March 2024 by the ED in the excise policy case. He spent over 30 days in custody but continued as CM.

• Court stance: High Court held that morality may demand resignation, but law does not compel it.

• Under the 130th Constitutional Amendment:

  • He would have been forced to resign on Day 31.

  • Reappointment is possible only after release.

?? The Kejriwal case is the real-world precedent that justifies the Bill for the government and exemplifies misuse risk for the opposition.

---

Political Impact of the 130th Constitutional Amendment

Government’s Gains

• Strengthens “anti-corruption” narrative.

• Prevents repeat of “CM from jail” situations.

• Tightens coalition discipline by ensuring cleaner faces in ministries.

Opposition’s Concerns

• Empowers investigative agencies to destabilise elected governments.

• Erodes the presumption of innocence.

• Likely to hit opposition-ruled states like Delhi and Jharkhand hardest.

Broader Consequences

• Governance Instability: Frequent removals and reappointments.

• Judicial Challenge: Could face basic structure review (democracy, federalism, Article 21).

• Electoral Narratives:

  • Ruling bloc ? “No minister from jail.”

  • Opposition ? “Democracy undermined by misuse.”

---

Scenario Forecast

1. Stalls in JPC: Govt wins narrative; opposition stresses due process.

2. Passes with safeguards: Possible judicial review clause or offence carve-outs.

3. Passes as-is: Likely constitutional challenges; political churn as opposition ministers risk removal.

---

Why This ABC Live Report is Unique

• Law + Data + Politics: Goes beyond news reporting to combine constitutional text, ADR data, and political forecasting.

• Case Law Mapping: Uses Lily Thomas, Manoj Narula, Shamsher Singh, Nabam Rebia, Vijay Madanlal.

• Case Study: Kejriwal’s arrest shows exactly how the amendment would change outcomes.

• Data Integration: Criminal exposure (46% MPs, 45% MLAs) quantified.

• Scenario Planning: Anticipates political outcomes, not just reactions.

?? Mainstream reports highlight govt–opposition clashes. ABC Live provides a governance playbook for India’s democracy.

---

Conclusion

The 130th Constitutional Amendment shifts India from a conviction-based disqualification system to a custody-based removal system.
It raises profound constitutional questions about democracy, federalism, and due process.
With nearly half of lawmakers facing criminal charges, the amendment’s impact could be systemic.

The Kejriwal case crystallised the issue, but the stakes go far beyond one leader. This amendment is both a political weapon and a constitutional flashpoint.

---

Why ABC Live Publishes This Now

• The Bill is under Joint Parliamentary Committee review (Aug 2025).

• Its impact is immediate, given ADR data on criminal records of lawmakers.

• ABC Live is unique in combining law, politics, data, and foresight into one report.

---

Sources

• PRS India – Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025

• ADR India – MPs/MLAs Criminal Cases Data

• The Hindu – Govt introduces 130th Amendment Bill

• Indian Express – Kejriwal case and Bill context

• Bar & Bench – Full Bill text

• Al Jazeera – Criticism of the 130th Amendment

• Supreme Court Judgments – Lily Thomas (2013),  Manoj Narula (2014), Shamsher Singh (1974), Nabam Rebia (2016), Anukul Chandra (1997), Vijay Madanlal (2022)

Also, Read

Jan Vishwas Bill 2025: Critical Data-Backed Analysis