Context:
• The Union Government has introduced a new Constitution Amendment Bill aiming to remove Ministers who remain under arrest for 30 consecutive days, triggering criticism from the Opposition over potential misuse.
• The proposal seeks to amend key provisions related to Union, State, and NCT of Delhi executive structures.
Key Highlights
- Constitutional Amendments Proposed
- Seeks changes to Article 75, Article 164, and Article 239AA.
• Applies to Union Ministers, State Ministers, and Delhi’s Council of Ministers.
- Mandatory Removal After 30-Day Detention
- A Minister must be removed if arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days for an offence punishable with ≥ 5 years imprisonment.
• Removal is done by:
– President → on PM’s advice
– Governor → on CM’s advice
• Advice must be issued by the 31st day of custody.
- Opposition Concerns Over Misuse
- Police arrest is discretionary, not mandatory, even in cognizable offences (as per BNSS).
• Fears that arbitrary or motivated arrests may be used to unseat Ministers.
• Ministers holding office may find bail difficult due to:
– Influence over witnesses
– Stringent bail provisions under special laws.
Significance
- If PM/CM Is Arrested
- The PM or CM must resign by Day 31, or they automatically cease to hold office.
- Interaction with BNSS & Arrest Rules
- BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) allows arrest for offences up to 7 years, but does not mandate arrest in every case.
• High Courts have repeatedly held that police are not duty-bound to arrest in all cognizable offences.
- Risk of Political Misuse
- Discretionary arrest + 30-day rule may be used to:
– Target Opposition leaders
– Create political instability
– Force automatic removal of Ministers
- No Safeguard for Default Bail
- Bill ignores Default Bail under Section 167(2) CrPC / Section 187 BNSS:
– Bail available if investigation not completed in 60–90 days
– A Minister may lose position before this safeguard applies.
- Applicability to Special Laws
- Phrase “any law” includes stringent statutes like:
– PMLA (Money laundering)
– NDPS (Narcotics)
– UAPA (Terror cases)
• These laws have strict bail conditions, raising the risk of:
– Prolonged custody
– Automatic disqualification of Ministers
Prelims-Oriented Facts (Most Important Section)
- Articles 75, 164 & 239AA.
Mains-Oriented Analysis
GS-2: Polity & Governance
- Constitutional Implications
• Alters the structure of executive accountability.
• Raises questions on separation of powers between police, courts, and executive authority.
• Tied to concepts of ministerial responsibility and constitutional morality. - Federal Concerns
• Applies equally to Union, States, and Delhi, affecting federal dynamics.
• Could reshape Centre–State political relations during contentious investigations. - Risk of Political Weaponisation
• Arrest powers, being discretionary, create potential for:
– Selective targeting
– Unseating elected governments
– Undermining democratic stability - Natural Justice & Due Process Issues
• Removal occurs before trial or even before default bail threshold.
• Violates presumption of innocence until proven guilty. - Implications for Governance
• May prevent Ministers with serious allegations from continuing in office
—but—
• May also destabilize governance by enabling misuse of arrest powers.