Employees Handling Public Money Expected To Maintain Highest Standards Of Integrity: Telangana High Court Upholds Dismissal Of Bank Manager Over Financial Irregularities No Specific Direction In Writ Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses To Initiate Contempt Against State For Non-Framing Of Rules 'DNA Report Not Conclusive Proof Of Absence Of Consent': J&K High Court Grants Bail To Accused In POCSO Case After Prosecutrix Turns Hostile Mere Knowledge Is Not A Crime: Karnataka High Court Quashes Charges Against Homestay Owner For Not Reporting Guest's Sexual Assault Bypassing DRT Strongly Deprecated: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Writ Challenging SARFAESI Notices, Reaffirms Bar Under Article 226 Tenant Cannot Induct Stranger And Claim Permission': MP High Court Upholds Eviction Decree Against Subtenant Landlord Must Produce Concrete Evidence To Establish Genuineness Of 'Bonafide Need'; Oral Testimony Not Sufficient: Kerala High Court Cannot Change Rules Of The Game Mid-Way: Calcutta High Court Quashes Refusal To Approve Selection Process Initiated Under 2005 Rules Joint Petitions Seeking Individual Relief Must Pay Court Fees 'Per Petitioner': Bombay High Court 'Body Found Severed In Multiple Pieces Doesn't Conclusively Prove Trespass': Allahabad High Court Awards ₹8 Lakh In Railway Untoward Incident Case POCSO | Cannot Apply 2019 Amendment Retrospectively: Supreme Court Restores Life Imprisonment In Child Rape Case Equivalence Of Pay Scale Doesn't Mean You Can Leapfrog: Supreme Court Restricts Scope Of Absorption For Surplus Employees Supreme Court Raps State Over Illegal Delegation Of Power: 'Statutory Duty Of Government Cannot Be Abdicated To Subordinate Officers' Natural Justice Is Not An Unruly Horse: Supreme Court Overturns HC Order Quashing Teacher's Termination Over Invalid B.Ed. Degree Order XLI Rule 27 CPC | Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order For Failing To Decide Application For Additional Evidence Criminal Proceedings Not A Recovery Mechanism: Supreme Court Quashes Complaint Used As Arm-Twisting Tactic Review Is Not An Appeal: Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Where High Court Reheard Case Under Guise Of Review Jurisdiction Filing Lawsuits Is A Statutory Right: Supreme Court Refuses To Term PepsiCo's Infringement Actions Against Farmers As 'Predatory' 'Promise To Marry' Vitiated If Complainant Is Already Married: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Mere Harassment Without Proximate Act Not Enough To Invoke Section 306 IPC: Supreme Court Quashes Abetment To Suicide Case Against Forest Officer Ill-Motivated' FIR: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Under Section 182 IPC For Lack Of Proper Compliance With Section 195 CrPC No Benefit Under MSMED Act If Arbitration Conducted Outside Facilitation Council: Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator NDPS | "Substantial Compliance" With Section 42 Can Bypass Strict Procedural Rigidities: Supreme Court Mere Naming In Suicide Note Not Enough: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Of Accused In Abetment To Suicide Case Cannot Sleep For 12 Years And Claim Benefits: Supreme Court Rejects Salary Arrear Claims Of 'Fence-Sitters'

Lok Sabha Introduces 113th Constitutional Amendment Bill: Ministers to Lose Office if Detained for 30 Days

20 August 2025 4:12 PM

By: sayum


New Delhi, August 20, 2025 – In a high-voltage session of Parliament, Union Home Minister Amit Shah introduced the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Lok Sabha. Popularly referred to as the 113th Amendment, the Bill proposes sweeping changes to ensure that the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, and other ministers cannot continue in office if detained for 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges.

What the 113th Amendment Proposes

Automatic Removal of Ministers – If any minister is arrested and detained for 30 days for an offence punishable with five years or more imprisonment, they must resign. Failing that, their office will automatically fall vacant on the 31st day.

Reappointment Permitted – Such individuals may be re-appointed after release, subject to constitutional procedure.

Applicability –

Article 75 – Union Council of Ministers, including the Prime Minister.

Article 164 – State Chief Ministers and Ministers.

Article 239AA – Chief Minister and Ministers of the NCT of Delhi.

This move is aimed at strengthening constitutional morality and ministerial accountability, ensuring that those under prolonged detention do not continue to wield executive power.

Introduction in Lok Sabha

The Bill was formally placed before the Lok Sabha on August 20, 2025.

It has been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed consideration.

Alongside, the Government also tabled the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025 and the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

Opposition Uproar

The introduction of the Bill led to dramatic protests:

Opposition MPs tore up copies of the Bills inside the House.

Pieces of paper were hurled towards Home Minister Amit Shah during his address.

Opposition leaders labelled the proposal “unconstitutional” and “undemocratic”, expressing fears of potential misuse against political rivals.

The uproar forced repeated interventions from the Speaker and highlighted the deep divisions across party lines.

Legal and Political Significance

Supporters’ View: The amendment bolsters political integrity, making it impossible for ministers under prolonged detention on serious charges to continue in constitutional positions.

Critics’ Concern: The measure may dilute the presumption of innocence and risks being weaponised in politically motivated cases.

As a constitutional amendment, the Bill will require a special majority in both Houses of Parliament, and possibly ratification by states, depending on the interpretation of federal provisions.

What Lies Ahead

The Joint Parliamentary Committee will now examine the Bill clause by clause.

After committee review, it will return to the Lok Sabha for debate and voting, and then move to the Rajya Sabha, where the Government faces a tougher test of numbers.

Constitutional scholars predict a long, contentious debate balancing rule of law, democratic safeguards, and political accountability.

The 113th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2025 seeks to disqualify ministers automatically if detained for 30 days on serious criminal charges. While projected as a step towards clean politics, the uproar in Parliament and strong opposition resistance suggest a turbulent legislative journey ahead.

Latest Legal News