131st Constitution Amendment Bill 2026

131st Constitution Amendment Bill 2026

Why in News? 

Recently, the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 was introduced in the Lok Sabha after a division vote, proposing expansion of Lok Sabha strength to 850 seats.

Provisions of 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2026

• Expansion of House Strength: The bill proposes to increase the maximum strength of the Lok Sabha from the current 550 members to 850 members. 
  • Of these, 815 seats are allocated to States, while 35 seats represent Union Territories. 
  • This structural shift aims to align parliamentary representation with India’s significant population growth since the 1971 Census baseline. 
• Delimitation: The Bill amends Article 82 to remove the “freeze” on seat readjustment that was mandated to last until the first Census after 2026. 
  • It replaces this with a provision allowing Parliament to determine the relevant Census data by law, effectively enabling immediate delimitation based on the 2011 Census figures. 
• Women’s Reservation: A primary objective is the amendment of Article 334A to decouple the 33% reservation for women from the requirement of a post-2026 Census.
  • This change allows the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam to take effect for the 2029 General Elections, reserving approximately 283 seats for women in the expanded House. 
• State Legislative Assembly: The Bill amends Article 170 to lift the moratorium on increasing State Legislative Assembly seats.
  • This enables a fresh readjustment of assembly boundaries across India to ensure more equitable representation based on current demographic realities.
• Delimitation Commission Framework: The legislation establishes a high-powered Delimitation Commission chaired by a Supreme Court Judge. 
  • This body is vested with the authority to redraw boundaries and readjust seat allocations. 
  • Notably, the Commission’s orders will have the force of law and cannot be challenged in any court of law.

Parliamentary Voting on 131st Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2026

As of April 16, 2026, the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 was formally introduced in the Lok Sabha following a heated procedural showdown and a recorded division of votes. 

• Division Vote: The Lok Sabha allowed the formal introduction of the Bill after the Opposition pressed for a division of votes.
  • The motion passed with 251 members voting in favour and 185 members voting against. 
• Special Majority: As a Constitutional Amendment, the Bill requires a special majority under Article 368 for final passage.
  • This necessitates approval by a majority of the total House membership and at least two-thirds of members present and voting (approximately 360–363 votes in the current Lok Sabha). 
  • Observers note the government remains roughly 67–70 votes short of this mandatory threshold without bipartisan support. 
  • The INDIA bloc, led by the Congress, SP, TMC, and DMK, has officially declared its decision to vote against the Bill.
• Voter Participation: The introduction phase saw 436 MPs participating in the e-voting process. 
  • Reports from the Sansad TV live feed recorded 207 to 251 Ayes and 126 to 185 Noes at different stages of the procedural motions, indicating significant attendance.
• Final Voting Schedule: The government has scheduled the final voting for passage to take place on Friday, April 17, 2026. 
  • In Rajya Sabha, the required two-thirds majority stands at about 163–164 votes. The ruling bloc has nearly 141 members, creating a gap of over 20 votes.
• Dependent Bill: A procedural motion was moved to suspend Rule 66, allowing the Delimitation Bill, 2026 and the UT Laws Bill to be voted upon simultaneously. 
  • Since these are dependent on the 131st Amendment, their legal validity is contingent upon the Constitutional Amendment clearing the two-thirds hurdle first. 

Criticisms Surrounding the Bill

• Politically Motivated Delimitation: A major criticism is that the Bill enables politically driven delimitation, with Opposition alleging the formula is designed to benefit ruling party strongholds. 
  • Critics argue it may alter electoral boundaries in a way that reshapes power balance rather than ensuring neutrality. 
• North–South Representation Divide: Experts highlight that population-based delimitation could favor northern states with higher population growth, while southern states may lose proportional influence despite better population control. This raises concerns over regional imbalance in federal representation. 
• Marginalized Communities: Critics argue the restructuring could lead to reduced political share for OBCs, Dalits, and Adivasis, calling it a form of “representation dilution.” 
  • Concerns have been raised that redistribution may shift electoral weight away from vulnerable groups.
• Structure Concerns: Several parties view the Bill as a threat to India’s cooperative federalism, arguing that states with successful population control policies may be penalized. This challenges the principle of equitable state representation within Parliament.
• Allegations of Gerrymandering: There are fears that the proposed delimitation mechanism could allow gerrymandering, i.e., manipulation of constituency boundaries for political or communal advantage. Critics cite past instances to warn about bias in constituency redesign. 
• Questioning Legislative Intent: Opposition parties argue the Bill uses women’s reservation as a “cover” to introduce broader electoral restructuring. They claim the core intent is power reconfiguration, not gender justice, raising doubts about policy transparency and intent.