Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and West Bengal’s Leader of Opposition, Suvendu Adhikari, has thrown his weight behind the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to remove Prime Ministers, Chief Ministers, and ministers facing serious criminal charges. The proposed legislation has sparked a heated debate, with opposition parties, notably the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), alleging it is a tool to suppress political rivals.

Speaking to ANI on Sunday, Adhikari emphasized that the bill aligns with public sentiment, stating, “This bill should be implemented. The general public also wants the same. Whatever the public wants will happen.” He framed the Constitution as a document “for the people, of the people, by the people,” rather than a shield for political parties. Adhikari accused opponents of the bill of uniting to protect corrupt leaders, claiming, “The ministers of the corrupt parties are jailed, and the same will be in the future. All the corrupt have united and are trying to stop it.”

The Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, stipulates that any Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or minister detained for 30 consecutive days on charges carrying a minimum five-year imprisonment term must resign. If they fail to do so, their office will automatically become vacant after 31 days. Notably, the bill allows for re-appointment upon release, offering flexibility to those cleared of charges.

Also Read: BJP Accuses Rahul of ‘Arrogance’ in Bihar Row

However, the Aam Aadmi Party has fiercely criticized the proposed legislation. Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh labeled it a calculated move by the Modi government to “jail opposition leaders in false cases and topple elected governments.” In a statement released on Sunday, Singh argued that the bill has “nothing to do with fighting corruption” and is instead designed to facilitate “horse-trading and crushing opposition parties.” The AAP’s accusations reflect broader concerns among opposition groups that the bill could be weaponized to destabilize non-BJP governments.

The bill has ignited a polarized debate, with supporters like Adhikari arguing it promotes accountability and curbs corruption, while critics warn of its potential misuse to target political adversaries. The provision for automatic vacancy after prolonged detention raises questions about due process, as it could penalize leaders before their guilt is established in court. Conversely, the allowance for re-appointment post-release aims to balance fairness, though it does little to quell opposition fears of selective enforcement.

As the bill progresses through legislative discussions, it is likely to face intense scrutiny from both sides of the political spectrum. Adhikari’s vocal endorsement underscores the BJP’s push for stricter measures against leaders facing criminal charges, while the AAP’s opposition highlights concerns about the erosion of democratic norms. The outcome of this legislative battle could reshape the political landscape, with significant implications for governance and accountability in India.

Also Read: Mann Vows to Protect Punjab Ration Cards