Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Monday questioned the consistency of Congress MP and Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s moral position, suggesting it had changed after three consecutive electoral defeats.
In an interview with a news agency, Shah contrasted Gandhi’s current stand with his actions in 2013, when he had publicly rejected and torn an ordinance introduced by then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s cabinet.
The ordinance, which was widely seen as benefiting RJD leader Lalu Prasad Yadav, sought to allow convicted lawmakers a three-month reprieve to retain their seats, effectively negating a Supreme Court ruling on the disqualification of convicted MPs and MLAs. It was later withdrawn.
“Why did Rahul Ji tear up the ordinance that Manmohan Singh brought to protect Lalu Ji? If there was morality that day, then what happened now? Just because you have lost three consecutive elections? Morality standards are not connected with victory or loss in elections. They should be steady like the Sun and the Moon,” Shah remarked.
Shah’s comments came as the government defended the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill, 2025, which proposes the automatic removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and Ministers if they are held in custody for 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges carrying a minimum punishment of five years.
The bill is currently under scrutiny by a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) of 31 members from both Houses. It has sparked intense debate, with critics warning it could be used to destabilise opposition-led governments. The government, however, maintains it is a step towards restoring constitutional morality.
Shah insisted the law applies equally to all parties, including the ruling BJP. “I am sure it will be passed. There will be many people in the Congress party and in the opposition who will support morality and maintain the moral ground,” he said.
The Union Home Minister further highlighted that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had included his own office within the ambit of the bill, a move he contrasted with former PM Indira Gandhi’s 39th Amendment, which had protected top officeholders from judicial scrutiny.
“The Prime Minister himself has included the post of PM in this. Earlier, Indira Gandhi had brought the 39th Amendment to protect the President, Vice President, PM and Speaker from judicial review by Indian courts. Narendra Modi ji has brought a constitutional amendment against himself that if the Prime Minister goes to jail, he will have to resign,” Shah said.
Opposition leaders have accused the government of using the bill as a political weapon, with concerns that court proceedings could be influenced to delay bail beyond the 30-day mark. Shah, however, argued that the judiciary would act responsibly.
Also Read : Man breaches security, kisses Rahul Gandhi during Bihar yatra
“Our court also understands the seriousness of the law. When one has to resign after 30 days, then before that, the court will decide whether the person should get bail or not. When the case went to the High Court, it was argued that Arvind Kejriwal should resign because he is in jail. The High Court said that we believe that he should resign on moral grounds but there is no provision in the current law,” he said.
Shah also posed the question of whether leaders could govern from behind bars.
“My party believes, the Prime Minister of the country believes that no CM, Minister or PM in this country can run the government while being in jail. When the Constitution was made, the Constitution makers would not have imagined such shamelessness that any CM would go to jail and remain the CM from jail,” he added.
The Home Minister clarified that under the proposed law, reinstatement would be possible once bail is granted.
Follow us
