The central government on Tuesday opposed a petition seeking a lifetime ban on convicted lawmakers from contesting elections. In an affidavit submitted before the Supreme Court, the Union government argued that imposing time-limited disqualifications serves as a deterrent while avoiding undue harshness. The government asserted that there is “nothing inherently unconstitutional in limiting the effect of penalties by time.”
This response came in reaction to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in 2016 by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 8 and 9 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petitioner sought a lifetime ban on convicted legislators.
Existing Laws on Convicted Lawmakers
Under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, legislators of a state Assembly or Parliament are barred from contesting elections for six years after completing their sentence if convicted of certain listed crimes or any offense carrying a jail term of two years or more.
Similarly, Section 9 of the Act prevents individuals dismissed from government service on grounds of corruption or disloyalty to the nation from contesting elections for five years after their removal.
On February 10, 2024, a Supreme Court bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta questioned the Union government on why the disqualification period for convicted lawmakers was restricted to just six years. The top court highlighted the contradiction of allowing lawbreakers to become lawmakers.
Government’s Argument Against Lifetime Ban
In its affidavit, the Union Law Ministry defended the existing provisions, arguing that the Parliament alone has the authority to decide such matters. The government stated:
“The disqualifications under the impugned sections are limited by time as a matter of parliamentary policy. The relief sought by the petitioner would amount to rewriting the provision, effectively substituting ‘six years’ with ‘life-long’ disqualification, which is beyond judicial intervention.”
The affidavit also cited the Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India (2021) case, where the Supreme Court ruled that courts cannot direct Parliament to enact or modify laws in a specific manner. Additionally, the government referred to the State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Satpal Saini (2017) ruling, which emphasized that policy-making is the role of the executive and legislature, and courts should only intervene when policies violate constitutional provisions.
The affidavit stressed that the question of imposing a lifetime ban on convicted lawmakers is a legislative decision and cannot be mandated by the judiciary.
Rising Criminalization in Indian Politics
The debate over banning convicted lawmakers comes at a time when the number of MPs facing criminal cases is at an all-time high. An analysis by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) has revealed that 46% of newly elected Lok Sabha MPs in 2024 have criminal cases against them, the highest ever in Indian parliamentary history.
Of the 543 winning candidates, 251 (46%) MPs have declared criminal cases against them, an increase from:
- 233 MPs (43%) in 2019
- 185 MPs (34%) in 2014
- 162 MPs (30%) in 2009
- 125 MPs (23%) in 2004
This reflects a 55% rise in the number of MPs with declared criminal cases.
Among the 251 winning candidates in 2024, 170 (31%) face serious criminal charges, including rape, murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, and crimes against women. This marks a 124% increase in MPs facing serious criminal cases since 2009.
- 159 (29%) MPs in 2019
- 112 (21%) MPs in 2014
- 76 (14%) MPs in 2009
Breakdown of Criminal Cases Among Political Parties
The ADR report provides a party-wise breakdown of criminal cases among the newly elected Lok Sabha MPs:
- BJP – 94 MPs out of 249 seats (39%)
- Congress– 49 MPs out of 99 seats (49%)
- Samajwadi Party (SP) – 21 MPs out of 37 seats(45%)
- TMC – 13 MPs out of 29 seats(45%)
- DMK – 13 MPs out of 22 seats(59%)
- TDP – 8 MPs out of 16 seats(50%)
- Shiv Sena – 5 MPs out of 7 seats(71%)
Among them, MPs facing serious criminal charges (murder, rape, etc.) include:
- 63 BJP MPs (26%)
- 32 Congress MPs (32%)
- 17 SP MPs (46%)
- 7 TMC MPs (24%)
- 6 DMK MPs (27%)
- 5 TDP MPs (31%)
- 4 Shiv Sena MPs (57%)
Serious Criminal Charges Among Elected MPs
The ADR analysis highlights that among the winning candidates in 2024:
- 27 MPs have been convicted in criminal cases.
- 4 MPs face murder charges under IPC Section 302.
- 27 MPs face attempt to murder charges under IPC Section 307.
- 15 MPs have declared cases related to crimes against women, including two facing rape charges under IPC Section 376.
- 4 MPs have declared cases related to kidnapping.
- 43 MPs have declared cases related to hate speech.
Electoral Impact of Criminal Records
The ADR report also found that candidates with criminal records had a much higher chance of winning elections compared to candidates with clean backgrounds.
- Winning chances of candidates with criminal cases in 2024: 15.3%
- Winning chances of candidates without criminal cases: 4.4%
This suggests that voters continue to elect candidates with criminal records, either due to political influence, lack of strong alternatives, or factors like caste, religion, and regional loyalty.
Conclusion
The debate over whether convicted lawmakers should face a lifetime ban from elections is gaining momentum, especially in light of the rising number of MPs facing serious criminal charges. While the Supreme Court has raised concerns over lawbreakers becoming lawmakers, the Central Government maintains that any changes to the law must be decided by Parliament, not the judiciary.
With 46% of newly elected MPs facing criminal charges, the issue of criminalization in politics remains a significant challenge for Indian democracy. Whether Parliament will take action on this matter remains to be seen.
