This opinion piece advocates for reimagining India's anti-defection law to strengthen democracy and prevent political instability. It argues that the current law, while intended to curb defections, has often led to political horse-trading and undermined internal party democracy. The article suggests that the law should focus on punishing individual defections that are clearly driven by personal gain, rather than penalizing collective decisions or mergers. It proposes reforms such as allowing legislators to vote according to their conscience on certain issues, clarifying the definition of defection, and ensuring timely decisions by presiding officers. The goal is to balance party discipline with legislative freedom and prevent misuse of the law for political manipulation.
- India's anti-defection law needs reimagining to prevent political instability and strengthen democracy.
- The current law often leads to horse-trading and undermines internal party democracy.
- Reforms should focus on punishing individual defections driven by personal gain, not collective decisions or mergers.
This opinion piece argues that the Indian opposition's focus has shifted from merely seeking to regain power to a broader mission of "reclaiming the Republic." It suggests that the opposition now views the current government as undermining democratic institutions and constitutional values, making the struggle existential rather than merely electoral. The article highlights the need for the opposition to move beyond electoral arithmetic and build a narrative that resonates with citizens, emphasizing constitutionalism, pluralism, and federalism. It calls for a unified strategy that addresses the erosion of democratic norms and protects the foundational principles of the Republic, rather than just focusing on winning elections.
- The Indian opposition's objective has broadened from regaining power to "reclaiming the Republic," viewing the current government as undermining democratic institutions.
- The struggle is now seen as existential, focusing on protecting constitutional values and democratic norms.
- The opposition needs to build a narrative centered on constitutionalism, pluralism, and federalism.
Seventy-five years after its enactment, India's First Amendment continues to cast a long shadow, particularly concerning the balance between freedom of speech and expression and reasonable restrictions. The amendment, introduced in 1951, aimed to curb perceived excesses of free speech, especially in the context of public order and defamation. Critics argue that it has been frequently invoked to suppress dissent and limit journalistic freedom, leading to a chilling effect. The article calls for a re-evaluation of its application to ensure that fundamental rights are protected while addressing genuine concerns about public order and national security.
- India's First Amendment, enacted in 1951, introduced "reasonable restrictions" on freedom of speech and expression.
- The amendment was a response to concerns about public order, defamation, and national security in the nascent republic.
- Critics argue that its broad interpretation has often been used to curb dissent and limit journalistic freedom.
The Supreme Court utilized its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to overturn a conviction under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. This decision was made in a case where the victim, who was a minor at the time of the incident, later married the accused as an adult. The court emphasized that Article 142 allows it to ensure "complete justice" when existing laws are insufficient, enabling the couple to live peacefully as spouses.
- The Supreme Court used Article 142 to quash a POCSO conviction.
- The decision was based on the fact that the victim and accused later married as adults.
- Article 142 grants the Supreme Court power to deliver "complete justice" where laws fall short.
Higher education in India is a crucial arena reflecting the evolving dynamics of Indian federalism, with competing visions between the Union and State governments on regulatory authority, curriculum, funding, and digital governance. Despite education being on the Concurrent List, the Union government's influence is growing, particularly through the NEP 2020, central funding mechanisms, and national regulatory agencies. States, however, are not merely passive recipients but engage in strategic adaptation, selectively implementing reforms based on local contexts and positioning themselves as regional education hubs, showcasing a negotiated form of federalism.
- Higher education governance in India is a key site for expressing the changing dynamics of federalism.
- The Union government's influence in higher education is expanding through policies like NEP 2020, central funding, and regulatory bodies.
- States exhibit strategic adaptation, selectively implementing central policies and pursuing their own educational priorities.
Census 2027, India's overdue population count, is vital for development, democracy, and accurate representation. After a 15-year gap, this two-phase exercise will gather comprehensive household and demographic data, including caste, which is included for the first time. The Census is crucial for targeted welfare measures, fund devolution, and addressing deprivations. Its findings will underpin new electoral boundaries and women's reservation in legislatures, making it central to representative democracy. The article emphasizes the importance of public participation for an accurate count, especially for marginalized groups, to ensure that policies and resources are guided by reliable data, moving beyond the 2011 Census and informed extrapolations.
- Census 2027 is a critical and overdue exercise for India, essential for informed policy-making, equitable development, and democratic representation.
- The Census will be conducted in two phases, collecting detailed household and demographic information, including caste for the first time.
- Accurate Census data is fundamental for targeted delivery of welfare measures, allocation of funds to states and local bodies, and addressing socio-economic deprivations.
The Supreme Court's May 27, 2026 judgment on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has sparked significant debate regarding the Election Commission of India's (ECI) powers and conduct. The Court upheld all ECI arguments, despite petitioners' concerns about the SIR's implementation in Bihar, just months before the 2025 Assembly election. Critics argue the SIR was conducted under a wrong provision of law (Section 21(3) instead of 21(2) of RP Act, 1950), leading to the deletion of millions of voters without proper redress. The judgment also grants the ECI broad authority to determine citizenship documents, a role typically belonging to the Home Ministry, raising questions about its constitutional mandate.
- The Supreme Court's judgment on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has raised questions about the ECI's powers and adherence to statutory provisions.
- Critics argue that the SIR was implemented under an incorrect legal provision, Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950, which is meant for special revision in a constituency, not an intensive revision across a whole state.
- The judgment's allowance for the ECI to determine citizenship documents for electoral roll purposes is seen as an overreach into the Home Ministry's domain.
The Supreme Court recently delivered two significant rulings impacting India's real-money online gaming industry. It upheld the constitutional validity of State laws prohibiting real-money gaming platforms, asserting that betting and gambling are 'res extra commercium' and fall under State legislative competence (Entry 34, List II). The Court also affirmed the Centre's retrospective 28% GST levy on online gaming companies, clarifying that GST applies to the full value of stakes, irrespective of whether games are skill-based or chance-based. The rulings emphasize that once money is staked on an uncertain outcome, the distinction between skill and chance becomes irrelevant for GST purposes. These judgments have severe implications for the industry, with many companies facing insolvency and potential shifts in operations.
- The Supreme Court upheld State laws prohibiting real-money online gaming, classifying betting and gambling as 'res extra commercium'.
- The Court affirmed that State governments have legislative competence to regulate such activities under Entry 34 of List II.
- The Centre's retrospective 28% GST levy on online gaming was upheld, applicable to the full value of stakes.
The Supreme Court recently upheld the use of DNA tests in a paternity dispute, navigating the complex question of balancing a child's right to know parentage with an individual's right to privacy. While previous judgments cautioned against routine DNA tests, this ruling emphasized the child's desire for closure. The court referenced the 2017 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, which established privacy as a fundamental right. It also cited the 2014 Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik case, affirming that scientific advancements should prevail over conclusive legal proof when in conflict, as exemplified by the N.D. Tiwari paternity case.
- The Supreme Court ruled on balancing a child's right to know paternity against an individual's right to privacy.
- The court upheld the use of DNA tests in a specific paternity dispute, moving beyond previous cautions against routine testing.
- The ruling acknowledges the fundamental right to privacy established in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case (2017).
The Home Ministry has notified changes to the Immigration and Foreigners Rules, 2025, altering registration requirements for foreigners in India. Foreigners on a visa for 180 days or less, who wish to stay beyond their visa period, must now register "any time before the expiry of the said period of 180 days." This replaces the previous rule that mandated registration "within 14 days after the expiry of one hundred and eighty days of arrival in India." Similarly, those on visas for more than 180 days with a "stay not exceeding 180 days" stipulation must also register before the 180-day expiry if they intend to stay longer.
- The Home Ministry has updated foreigner registration regulations under the Immigration and Foreigners Rules, 2025.
- Foreigners on visas of 180 days or less must now register before the 180-day expiry if they plan to extend their stay.
- This new rule replaces the previous requirement to register within 14 days after 180 days of arrival.
The Supreme Court welcomed five new judges, increasing its working strength to 37, leaving only one position vacant. These appointments follow the Centre's decision to raise the court's sanctioned strength from 33 to 37 judges (excluding the Chief Justice of India) through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026. CJI Surya Kant administered the oath of office to the new appointees, who include former Chief Justices of various High Courts and a senior advocate. This move aims to address the workload and ensure timely justice delivery in the apex court.
- The Supreme Court's working strength has increased to 37 judges with the appointment of five new judges.
- This expansion follows the Centre's decision to raise the sanctioned strength from 33 to 37, excluding the Chief Justice of India.
- The increase was facilitated by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026.
The article discusses the Supreme Court's inherent power under Article 142 of the Constitution to deliver 'complete justice,' especially when existing laws are inadequate. This power acts as a 'constitutional safety valve,' allowing the Court to go beyond strict procedural constraints to prevent injustice. While critics argue it can lead to judicial overreach, encroaching on executive or legislative domains, the author defends its necessity for addressing evolving social realities and ensuring substantive justice. The article clarifies that High Courts, though capable of delivering justice, do not possess powers equivalent to the Supreme Court's under Article 142, which is crucial for applying due process in rapidly changing societal contexts.
- The Supreme Court possesses inherent power under Article 142 for delivering 'complete justice' when laws are insufficient.
- Article 142 acts as a 'constitutional safety valve,' enabling the Court to transcend procedural limitations to prevent injustice.
- The exercise of Article 142 often faces criticism for potential judicial overreach, but it is defended as essential for evolving social realities.
The defection of seven Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MPs in the Rajya Sabha, invoking the 'merger' exception under the 10th Schedule to join the BJP, has raised significant constitutional questions. The article analyzes whether a merger can be effected solely by two-thirds of a legislature party or if it requires a decision from the original political party. It argues that the 10th Schedule's Paragraph 4 implies the merger of the political party itself, not just a numerical alignment within the legislature. This interpretation is crucial for preserving the integrity of the party system and the institution of opposition in parliamentary democracy, highlighting the need for judicial clarity from the Supreme Court.
- The defection of AAP MPs in Rajya Sabha under the 'merger' exception raises constitutional questions.
- The core issue is the interpretation of Paragraph 4 of the 10th Schedule regarding political party merger versus legislature party alignment.
- The article argues for the primacy of the political party's decision in a merger to maintain democratic accountability.
Himanta Biswa Sarma took oath as the Chief Minister of Assam for his second consecutive term, marking a historic first for a non-Congress leader in the state. Governor Lakshman Prasad Acharya administered the oath in Guwahati. Four other ministers, including Rameswar Teli, Ajanta Neog (BJP), Atul Bora (AGP), and Charan Boro (BPF), were also sworn in. The event was attended by prominent figures like Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, and the U.S. Ambassador to India, Sergio Gor, highlighting the significance of the NDA's third consecutive term in Assam.
- Himanta Biswa Sarma was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Assam for a second consecutive term.
- This marks the first time a non-Congress leader has served two straight terms as Assam CM.
- Governor Lakshman Prasad Acharya administered the oath of office and secrecy.
The article discusses the Governor's critical role when no single party secures a clear majority in state elections, leading to a hung assembly. The Governor, as the constitutional head, invites the largest party or pre-poll alliance to form the government, but discretion is involved. Precedents and Supreme Court judgments emphasize that the Governor must act judiciously, ensuring stability and adhering to constitutional propriety. Key issues include the timing of inviting parties, the floor test, and the formation of post-poll alliances. The Sarkaria Commission and the Punchhi Commission have provided recommendations to guide the Governor's actions in such scenarios, stressing the need for transparency and fairness.
- In a hung assembly, the Governor's role is crucial in inviting parties to form a government.
- The Governor's discretion must be exercised judiciously, guided by constitutional provisions and precedents.
- The largest single party or pre-poll alliance is usually invited first, but post-poll alliances can also be considered.
The Supreme Court questioned whether a "proper debate" was held in Parliament before enacting the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. This law replaced a selection committee that included the Chief Justice of India with one comprising the Prime Minister, a Union Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of the Opposition. The court's query arose during a hearing on petitions challenging the new law, which critics argue undermines the independence of the Election Commission by giving the executive greater control over appointments. The court emphasized the importance of parliamentary deliberation for laws impacting constitutional bodies.
- The Supreme Court questioned the adequacy of parliamentary debate on the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) appointment law.
- The 2023 Act replaced a selection committee that included the Chief Justice of India with one dominated by the executive.
- Petitions challenge the new law, arguing it compromises the Election Commission's independence.
This article delves into the concept of "legal fiction" as applied to party mergers, particularly in the context of anti-defection law. It explains that legal fiction treats something as true even if it's not, for specific legal purposes, like deeming a merged party as the original party. The Supreme Court's interpretation in cases like the Goa Assembly merger has highlighted how this fiction can impact the disqualification of legislators. The article discusses the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which allows mergers if two-thirds of legislators agree, and how the legal fiction aims to prevent defection while ensuring political stability, though it raises questions about its scope and potential for misuse.
- Legal fiction in party mergers treats a merged entity as the original party for specific legal purposes.
- The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution allows for party mergers if two-thirds of legislators agree, providing an exception to anti-defection rules.
- The Supreme Court has interpreted the scope of legal fiction, particularly in cases involving the disqualification of legislators post-merger.
This Parley discusses the need to amend India's abortion laws, particularly regarding time limits for minor rape victims and improving access to safe terminations. Dipika Jain and Alka Barua highlight that current laws, while seemingly liberal, face challenges in interpretation and implementation, leading to delays and unsafe practices. They argue for removing rigid gestational limits, especially for survivors of sexual assault and minors, who often present late due to trauma and lack of awareness. The discussion emphasizes shifting towards a rights-based reproductive justice framework, ensuring decisional autonomy for pregnant persons, and addressing the chilling effect on healthcare providers due to criminalization fears.
- India's abortion laws, despite appearing liberal, face implementation challenges leading to delays and unsafe practices.
- Rigid gestational limits disproportionately affect minor rape victims and sexual assault survivors who often seek terminations late.
- There is a strong argument for removing strict time limits, allowing clinical judgment to determine safety, especially in cases of trauma.
The Supreme Court observed that entertaining petitions on religious practices could lead to a deluge of similar cases, potentially disrupting India's unique civilisational fabric where religion is deeply intertwined with society. During the Sabarimala review case hearing, Justice B.V. Nagarathna highlighted India's identity as a "civilisation" with a constant link between people and religion, questioning the courts' role in intervening in such matters. Justice M.M. Sundresh echoed concerns about opening floodgates if fundamental rights challenges are allowed against religious beliefs, suggesting it could break down every religion and constitutional court.
- The Supreme Court cautioned against judicial intervention in religious practices, fearing a flood of similar petitions.
- Justice B.V. Nagarathna emphasized India's unique civilisational identity, where religion and society are intimately connected.
- The court questioned whether judicial forums are appropriate for examining and intervening in matters of faith.
The article examines constitutional provisions and legal precedents regarding a Chief Minister's (CM) tenure, specifically when they cease to hold office due to losing the Legislative Assembly's confidence. While Article 164 states a CM holds office "during the pleasure of the Governor," this is not absolute, being contingent on maintaining Assembly confidence. The Governor can remove a CM who has lost confidence, but the CM must be allowed to prove their majority via a floor test. The article emphasizes that the ultimate test of confidence lies on the floor of the House, not the Governor's subjective assessment, and discusses the Governor's role in summoning the Assembly.
- A Chief Minister holds office "during the pleasure of the Governor," but this is conditional on retaining the confidence of the Legislative Assembly.
- The Governor can remove a CM who has lost confidence, but the CM must be given an opportunity to prove their majority through a floor test.
- The Governor's power to summon the Assembly for a floor test is crucial in determining the CM's majority.
The Supreme Court clarified that the Chief Justice of India's (CJI) involvement in appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) was a temporary measure, pending a new law from Parliament. This statement came during challenges to the 2023 Act, which replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister on the selection panel. Petitioners argue the new law grants the executive dominant control, overriding a March 2023 Constitution Bench judgment (Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India) that mandated a committee including the PM, LoP, and CJI to ensure the Election Commission's "fierce independence."
- The Supreme Court stated that the CJI's role in the CEC and EC appointment committee was a temporary arrangement until Parliament enacted a new law.
- Petitions challenge the 2023 Act, which replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister on the selection panel, arguing it gives the executive excessive control.
- The 2023 Act effectively countermands the March 2023 Constitution Bench judgment in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India.
The Andaman and Nicobar Islands administration approved the ₹92,000-crore Great Nicobar Island project, despite failing to meet the mandated 50% quorum at gram sabha meetings. Attendance ranged from 2% to 15%, which the administration defended as "proper quorum" in the Calcutta High Court. Petitions allege violations of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), which requires 50% adult population attendance (one-third women) for a quorum. The administration claimed due process and tribal representation via the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC). However, petitioners argue Nicobarese and Shompen tribes are covered by Tribal Councils, not gram sabhas, and highlighted repeated names in attendance lists.
- The A&NI administration approved the ₹92,000-crore Great Nicobar Island project despite failing to meet the mandated 50% quorum for gram sabha meetings.
- The administration argued in court that low attendance (2-15%) still constituted a "proper quorum" and that tribal representation was ensured via the Sub-Divisional Level Committee (SDLC).
- Petitioners allege violations of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) and contend that Nicobarese and Shompen tribal communities should be consulted through Tribal Councils, not gram sabhas.
Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma resigned following an inquiry into unaccounted cash found at his Delhi residence in 2025. The Supreme Court Collegium repatriated him, and an in-house committee found 'covert or active control' over the cash, recommending impeachment. The Law Ministry reported 8,630 complaints against judges between 2016-2025, but details on actions taken are scarce, leading to calls for greater transparency. Activists argue that judicial corruption is difficult to address due to opacity and lack of effective mechanisms, with even impeachment requiring political will. The article also touches upon a related controversy where an NCERT textbook referencing 'corruption in the judiciary' was withdrawn.
- Justice Yashwant Varma resigned following an inquiry into unaccounted cash found at his residence.
- The Supreme Court Collegium initiated an in-house inquiry, which recommended impeachment.
- Concerns about opacity in handling complaints against judges and lack of effective accountability mechanisms were raised.
Urban populations in India, particularly the poor, migrants, and ethnic/religious minorities, face systematic electoral disenfranchisement. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, intended to update voter lists, often leads to large-scale deletions due to rigid documentation requirements and proof of stable residence, which are challenging for mobile urban workers. This process, coupled with concerns about the compromised secrecy of booth-wise vote revelations, disproportionately affects vulnerable groups. The article highlights significant voter deletions in major cities, indicating that the SIR process acts as an exclusive, bureaucratic barrier rather than promoting maximum outreach, undermining universal adult franchise.
- Urban populations, especially the poor, migrants, and minorities, are systematically disenfranchised in India.
- The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls contributes to large-scale voter deletions due to rigid documentation and proof of residence requirements.
- The compromised secrecy of booth-wise vote revelations in the electronic voting machine system poses a challenge to the confidential nature of the franchise.