Key Points:
The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, proposes removing the PM, CMs, or ministers held in custody for over 30 days on serious charges.
Two related bills apply the same provisions to Jammu & Kashmir and Puducherry, allowing removal of ministers if arrested on serious criminal charges.
Leaders like Manish Tewari, Owaisi, and Rahul Gandhi opposed the bills, calling them unconstitutional.
The BJP-led NDA government proposed three new bills in the Lok Sabha on 20 August, 2025. The proposed bills caused a major uproar from the opposition. They stated that the new amendment bills proposed by Home Minister Amit Shah are “violative of the Constitution.”
The three bills proposed during the Monsoon session are as follows: The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and The Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025.
The bills proposed during the Lok Sabha session deal with the removal of the PM, CM, and ministers in states and Union Territories. The bill provides for the automatic removal of ministers from their office if they are arrested for more than 30 days on charges that carry jail sentences of 5 years or more.
The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, seeks to remove Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers, or ministers if they remain under judicial custody for more than 30 days. If such a scenario arises and a leader stays in judicial custody on the 31st day, then he or she will cease to hold office from the following day.
What are the provisions of the bill?
There are two major grounds on which a minister can be removed from their position:
If he or she is accused of a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment for a period of 5 years or more.
If a minister has been arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days under judicial custody without bail.
The process for removing any minister under the PM CM removal bill follows a designated procedure. If a minister from the central government is detained for involvement in a criminal act, the President will remove him or her on the advice of the Prime Minister. If the Prime Minister fails to act before the mandated deadline, then the minister will automatically cease to hold office after the 31st day.
The same procedure applies at the state level, where the Governor will act on the advice of the Chief Minister. A minister removed under these provisions may be re-appointed to the position after release from judicial custody.
See Also: Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha Adjourned Till 11 AM Tomorrow
Two other bills were subsequently proposed by Amit Shah to apply these provisions of the PM–CM removal bill to the Union Territories of Puducherry and Jammu and Kashmir.
The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025 seeks to remove the Chief Minister or any other minister from Jammu and Kashmir if arrested on serious criminal charges. The bill amends the Jammu and Kashmir (Reorganisation) Act, 2019, which reorganised Jammu and Kashmir into two UTs—Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and UT of Ladakh.
The Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025 seeks to remove any minister from Puducherry if he or she is detained in custody for a criminal offence. This bill amends the Act under which a legislative assembly and a council of ministers were established for the government of Puducherry. The grounds of removal follow the same procedure as the One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment Bill, 2025.
Home Minister Amit Shah proposed all three bills during the Lok Sabha session held on 20 August, 2025. He introduced them as a move to combat corruption. The bills aim to address criminalisation in politics by removing any minister facing criminal charges. However, the announcement caused a major ruckus in the Lok Sabha and faced resistance from the opposition.
As soon as the bills were introduced, many leaders opposed them, saying it was not an attempt to curb corruption but to create a “police state.” The opposition has alleged that the bills can be politically misused.
Congress MP Manish Tewari said the bill changes the rule of “innocent until proven guilty.” He argued, “The Indian Constitution says there should be rule of law, and the basis of that is that you are innocent until proven guilty. This hopes to change that.” Tewari, who is also a lawyer, further pointed out:
“This is against the jurisprudence of criminal justice, distorts parliamentary democracy, and can lead to political misuse.MP Manish Tewari
AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi argued that the bills give the government “a free run to become judge and executioner based on flimsy allegations and suspicions.” He accused the central government led by PM Modi of being “hell-bent on creating a police state.”
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi condemned the Centre’s proposal of three bills to remove PMs, CMs, or ministers held under judicial custody on criminal charges. He questioned the intention behind the bills, saying,
“We are going back to medieval times when the king could just remove anybody at his will, or if he didn’t like someone’s face, he could get the ED to arrest them, and a democratically elected person can be thrown out within 30 days.”Rahul Gandhi
Current update on the bills
After strong criticism from opposition leaders, the government referred the bills to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for review. The committee consists of members from both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, with 21 members from the Lok Sabha and 10 from the Rajya Sabha, representing both the government and opposition parties.
The committee’s report will not bind the government. It must submit its report by the last day of the first week of the upcoming session in November. [Rh/VS]
Also Read: