Centre to Introduce Bills for Removal of PM, CMs Arrested on Serious Charges

The government is set to introduce a bill in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday.

That will provide a legal framework for the removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, or Ministers of Union Territories, including Jammu and Kashmir, if they are arrested or detained on serious criminal charges, officials confirmed.

The proposed legislation aims to amend Articles 75, 164, and 239AA of the Constitution, as well as Section 54 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019. Under the bill, any Minister—including the Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Union Territory Minister—who is arrested and held in custody for 30 consecutive days for an offence punishable with five years or more of imprisonment will be liable to removal from office.

For Jammu and Kashmir, the bill proposes a new clause, (4A), in Section 54 of the Reorganisation Act. It specifies that a Minister arrested and held in custody for 30 consecutive days during their term will be removed by the Lieutenant Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister by the 31st day. If the Chief Minister does not provide such advice, the Minister will automatically cease to hold office from the next day.

A similar process is proposed for the Union and State Governments, where a detained Minister or Prime Minister will be removed automatically on the 31st day of continuous custody.

The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the bill emphasizes the need to safeguard constitutional morality and maintain public trust in elected representatives. It notes that while elected leaders represent the aspirations of the people, there is currently no constitutional provision to remove a sitting Prime Minister or Minister facing serious criminal charges.

“It is expected that the character and conduct of Ministers holding office should be beyond suspicion,” the statement read. “A Minister facing allegations of serious criminal offences, arrested and detained, may compromise constitutional morality, hinder good governance, and diminish public trust in the office they hold.”