The anti-defection law explained

What is the anti-defection law?

It is the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which disqualifies MPs and MLAs who abandon the party on whose ticket they were elected. The aim is to stop legislators from switching sides after an election. A member found to have defected loses their seat in the House.

Who can be disqualified, and for what?

A party member can be disqualified for voluntarily giving up party membership, or for voting or abstaining against the party’s direction without permission. These are the two grounds in paragraph 2(1). A vote against the whip is not grounds for disqualification if the party condones it within 15 days.

The Schedule also covers members who did not join a party when elected:

• An independent who joins any political party after the election is disqualified.
• A nominated member may join a party within six months of taking their seat. Joining after that leads to disqualification.

When is switching parties allowed?

Only through a merger backed by at least two-thirds of the legislature party. Under paragraph 4, members are protected if their original party merges with another and they join the merged party, or if they refuse the merger and sit as a separate group. The merger counts only if “not less than two-thirds of the members of the legislature party concerned have agreed to such merger”.

There used to be a second route. Paragraph 3 protected a “split” by one-third of a legislature party, but the Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act, 2003 deleted it.

Presiding officers have their own exemption under paragraph 5. A Speaker, Deputy Speaker or Deputy Chairman who leaves their party on taking office is not disqualified, provided they do not rejoin it or join another party while in office.

The Tenth Schedule in four numbers

• 2/3share of a legislature party that must agree to a merger
• 15 daystime a party has to condone a vote against its whip
• 6 monthswindow for a nominated member to join a party
• 3 monthstime the Supreme Court said a Speaker should normally take to decide a petition

Who decides, and can the courts step in?

The Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha decides, and the decision is final, but courts can review it on narrow grounds. Paragraph 6 gives the presiding officer the power to rule on disqualification. Paragraph 7 tried to bar courts from the subject entirely.

The Supreme Court held paragraph 7 invalid in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu, reported in 1992. It kept the Speaker’s decision final but open to judicial review for jurisdictional errors, mala fides, breach of the constitutional mandate or a violation of natural justice, according to LiveLaw. Courts cannot step in before the Speaker has decided.

Does the Speaker have a deadline?

Not in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has said three months is the norm. In Keisham Meghachandra Singh (2020), the Court said a Speaker should decide a disqualification petition within a reasonable time, which, barring exceptional circumstances, means three months from filing, LiveLaw reports.

The Court used that deadline in July 2025. On 31 July 2025, in Padi Kaushik Reddy v. State of Telangana, it told the Telangana Speaker to decide petitions against 10 BRS MLAs who had joined the Congress within three months. When the Speaker did not act, contempt proceedings followed, LiveLaw says. The Speaker disposed of the remaining petitions on 12 March 2026.

Which cases tested the law in 2026?

Three switches in Parliament, all using the merger route.

Anti-defection cases in Parliament, 2026

1. Apr 2026Seven of AAP's 10 Rajya Sabha MPs apply to the Chairman to recognise their 'merger' with the BJP. Bar & Bench reports the Chairman has accepted it.
2. 22 Jun 2026Six of Shiv Sena (UBT)'s nine Lok Sabha MPs move to Eknath Shinde's Shiv Sena. Their party seeks their disqualification.
3. 18 Jul 2026Speaker Om Birla approves the Shiv Sena merger and lets 20 rebel Trinamool MPs, who declared a merger with the NCPI, sit separately.
4. 1 Sep 2026The Tribune reports the NCPI's recognition is still pending with the Speaker.

The Shiv Sena merger took the Shinde-led party to 13 Lok Sabha MPs, Deccan Chronicle reported. The 20 Trinamool rebels were among the 29 MPs the party won in 2024.

Both parties that lost MPs have sought their disqualification. “Any group of a legislature party cannot merge into some other party on its own, even if they have a two-thirds majority,” Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Anil Desai said, according to Deccan Chronicle. Trinamool’s Abhishek Banerjee filed 20 disqualification petitions, arguing that legislators cannot claim a valid merger without two-thirds of the full party, the same report said.

What do critics say?

That the merger exception has become a door for defection, and that Speakers can delay decisions. Writing in Bar & Bench, advocate Narasimhan Vijayaraghavan argued that the AAP move met the two-thirds number but not the law. In his reading, paragraph 4 is about a merger of the original political party, and AAP still exists as a party.

In LiveLaw, Dhruva Upadhye argued that delays by Speakers had undermined the law, citing the Telangana case. Both are commentators’ views. We found no Supreme Court ruling on the 2026 Parliament cases as of 11 October 2026.

Does the law apply to state legislatures too?

Yes. The Tenth Schedule covers both Houses of Parliament and state legislatures. Disqualification proceedings are deemed to be proceedings in Parliament or the state legislature under Articles 122 and 212. For questions about a Speaker or Chairman themselves, a member elected by the House decides.