Key Bill Could Have Blocked Raghav Chadha From Splitting AAP
Debate grows over law that might have prevented AAP split.
The dramatic split in the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), in which Raghav Chadha and six other Rajya Sabha MPs merged with the BJP, has revived a forgotten private Member’s Bill that Chadha himself introduced in 2022—one that could have made such a move far harder, if not impossible, under the anti‑defection law. The irony lies in the fact that the very MP who led the split once proposed a stricter version of the same law whose “merger” loophole he later used.
Under the current Tenth Schedule framework, lawmakers can avoid disqualification by “merging” with another party if at least two‑thirds of their original group in a House support the move. In the AAP Rajya Sabha case, that two‑thirds threshold worked out to seven MPs: Chadha plus six others. Because they crossed that number, their move to the BJP was treated as a constitutional merger rather than individual defection, and they were not disqualified.
In August 2022, however, Chadha introduced a private Member’s Bill that sought to toughen the anti‑defection regime. His proposal would have raised the merger threshold from two‑thirds to three‑fourths of a party’s House contingent and would have barred defecting lawmakers from contesting elections for the next six years. In the AAP split scenario, that higher three‑fourths bar would have required eight MPs to go together, meaning Chadha would have needed an eighth disaffected colleague—a number he did not secure.
Also Read: Kodagu Homestay Owner Arrested for Withholding Information in US Tourist Sexual Assault Case
Had his 3/4th Bill been passed, the political calculus would have changed: not only would the number bar have been higher, but the added penalty of a six‑year election ban would have made the jump far riskier for both the MPs and the BJP. The Bill was never taken up seriously in the Rajya Sabha, but its existence now looms over the AAP split as a kind of “what‑if” text: a set of rules that could have forced a rethink in the minds of those who believed the current merger clause was a safe exit route.
The episode has also reignited debate over whether the anti‑defection law still serves its original purpose of curbing “horse‑trading” or has instead become a tool for legalising large‑scale party switches under the guise of merger. As lawmakers and legal experts revisit Chadha’s 2022 proposal, the AAP split has turned into a case study of how a single, unenacted Bill might have altered the course of India’s fast‑moving political arithmetic.
Also Read: Iran's Parliament Speaker Cites Unplayed Oil Cards Against US
