Amritpal Singh is unlikely to lose his MP seat under Article 101(4). Approved leave for unavoidable absences—such as detention—excludes his nonattendance from counting. A formal vote is required to declare a seat vacant, and historical precedent shows courts protect MPs’ rights, making arbitrary disqualification highly unlikely. Parliamentary rights ensure protection.
Copyright infringement not intended
Could Amritpal Singh Lose His MP Seat Under Article 101(4)?
Article 101(4) of the Constitution states: “If for a period of sixty days a member of either House of Parliament is, without permission of the House, absent from all meetings thereof, the House may declare his seat vacant.”
However, this 60-day period excludes periods when Parliament is prorogued (adjourned sine die) or adjourned for more than four consecutive days, which means absences are only counted during active sittings
Amritpal Singh, the MP from Khadoor Sahib, has been detained under the National Security Act in Dibrugarh since April 2023. He won the 2024 Lok Sabha election from prison but has attended only 2% of Parliament’s sittings (one sitting—his swearing-in in July 2024).
He has missed nearly 50 sittings since July 2024, due to his detention.
The phrase in Article 101(4) is “without permission of the House.” MPs can seek leave from the Committee on Absence of Members from the Sittings of the House. This parliamentary panel rarely rejects applications, especially for uncontrollable reasons like imprisonment.
Even if an MP exceeds 60 absences, the House must formally “declare” the seat vacant via a vote. This procedural step makes arbitrary disqualification unlikely.
Amritpal has petitioned the Punjab and Haryana High Court to attend Parliament sessions, signaling proactive engagement. Courts have historically protected MPs’ rights to participate unless proven dereliction exists.
Former Lok Sabha Secretary General stated that not a single instance where Article 101(4) led to an MP losing their seat. MPs commonly seek leave for illness or familial emergencies, but imprisonment is also a valid ground. The committee prioritizes equity over strict enforcement. |
Must Read Articles:
Source:
PRACTICE QUESTION Q. Parliamentary privileges, such as immunity from defamation suits, are essential for MPs to perform their duties. Evaluate the balance between these privileges and the need for transparency in a democracy. 250 words |
© 2025 iasgyan. All right reserved