The Joint Parliamentary Committee deferred its draft report on the 130th Amendment Bill to seek wider consensus and stakeholder consultations.
JPC chairperson Aparajita Sarangi emphasized the need for national unanimity on the bill, calling it a national cause.
Opposition MPs Asaduddin Owaisi and Supriya Sule withdrew their dissent notes following the committee's decision to defer the report.
A joint parliamentary committee reviewing the 130th Amendment Bill deferred clearing its draft report on Friday, even as members voted on the panel's five recommendations. The move came ahead of Parliament's Monsoon session, scheduled to run from July 20 to August 13.
The panel had recently distributed the draft report to its members. During individual voting on each proposal, the lawmakers agreed that they needed more internal debates and external consultations before finalizing the document. This sudden postponement prompted AIMIM's Asaduddin Owaisi and NCP (SP) MP Supriya Sule to retract their formal dissent notes.
Call for National Unanimity
JPC chairperson and BJP MP Aparajita Sarangi said, as PTI reported "The joint parliamentary committee unanimously said that we needed more consultations with stakeholders."
"This is a national cause. There should be unanimity in thought and expression," Sarangi added. She urged all political groups to unite behind a draft that is "good for the nation" the country.
Lawmakers had cleared two proposals and were debating the third when they paused the process, panel members said. Some ruling BJP legislators opposed the initial two clauses, though the majority still approved them, the Times of India report said.
Key Recommendations Outlined
The panel recommended that the prime minister, Union ministers and chief ministers be suspended, rather than permanently removed from office, if they are detained for 30 consecutive days on charges of serious offences, pending the outcome of legal proceedings.
It also proposed an automatic reversal clause if such persons are acquitted or if prosecution does not proceed within a specified period.
The committee further proposed that the term "serious criminal offences", as mentioned in the statement of objects and reasons of the bill, be defined as "...serious criminal offences which are punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or more".
Passing these constitutional amendments requires a two-thirds majority of the lawmakers present and voting in the House. Currently, the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 lacks any provision to remove a chief minister or minister held in custody on grave criminal charges. To address this gap, the bill proposes amending Section 45 of the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 to establish a legal framework for such removals.
Approval of these proposals will trigger the next steps. The Union Home Ministry will present the suggested changes to the Union Cabinet. Following this, the ministry will table formal amendments in the Lok Sabha.
(With PTI Inputs)
