Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Must Implement Modified Preliminary Decree In Full: Telangana High Court Directs Partition Of Property Omitted In Final Decree Proceedings If Grievance Is Real But Lies Before Different Forum, Plaint Should Be Returned Under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, Not Rejected: Rajasthan High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due To Severity Of Economic Offence If Evidence Is Documentary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Compliance With Mandatory Duty To Inform Grounds Of Arrest Under Section 47 BNSS Is Impermissible: Orissa High Court Grants Bail Land Acquisition Award Finality Under Section 12 Is A Bar To Writ Petitions Challenging 'Public Necessity': Madhya Pradesh High Court State As Eminent Domain Is Obligated To Pay Adequate Compensation, Not Minimum To Suit Its Convenience: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Grants Emergency Parole To Life Convict To Execute Sale Deed, Repay Bank Loan To Prevent Family's Eviction High Court Cannot Act As Court Of First Instance In Service Matters Amenable To CAT Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Election Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction To Declare Caste Certificate Forged, Authority Vests Solely With Scrutiny Committee: Allahabad High Court Order IX Rule 7 CPC Requires 'Good Cause' Not 'Sufficient Cause'; Trial Court Can't Apply Higher Threshold To Pre-Decree Proceedings: Telangana High Court Victim Cannot Maintain Appeal Seeking Enhancement Of Sentence Under Section 372 CrPC; Such Power Exclusively With State: Rajasthan High Court Disability Pension: Presumption In Favour Of Personnel If Found Fit At Enrollment; Percentage Must Be Rounded Off: Punjab & Haryana HC Employee Entitled To Second Kramonnati Benefit If Promotion To Higher Post Does Not Result In Higher Pay Scale: Madhya Pradesh High Court Borrowers Can Be Granted Opportunity To Clear Loan Overdues In Installments To Prevent Coercive Action Under SARFAESI Act: Kerala High Court

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