A Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill has recommended a shift from automatic removal to suspension for a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister who remains in judicial custody for 30 continuous days. The recommendation keeps the bill’s core aim intact: public office should not function from jail, but the legal design should be less stigmatizing and more reversible.

The committee’s report says the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act are silent on what should happen when such office-holders are arrested and held in custody on serious charges. The committee therefore tries to create a clearer constitutional and administrative response to a gap that existing law does not expressly cover.

What the Joint Parliamentary Committee has recommended

The panel has proposed that the legal effect should remain immediate in practice, because the office-holder would still demit office. The committee, however, prefers the word suspension over removal because suspension is less stigmatizing and closer to a reversible administrative measure.

The committee has also suggested three related safeguards:

Serious criminal offences should be defined as offences punishable with five years or more in prison.There should be automatic restoration if the person is discharged, acquitted, or the case does not proceed within a prescribed time.Fast-track courts should handle cases involving high constitutional functionaries.

Related current affairs