CAPF Bill on Deputation Faces Opposition Citing SC Judgment, 2025

MoS Home Nityanand Rai introduced the CAPF Bill, 2026, in the Rajya Sabha, proposing high levels of deputation for senior posts. The INDIA bloc opposed it, citing a 2025 Supreme Court judgment, leading to protests and heated exchanges.

Minister of State (MoS) Home Nityanand Rai on Wednesday introduced the Central Armed Police Forces (General Administration) Bill, 2026, in the Rajya Sabha, while the INDIA bloc MPs opposed the legislation.

Bill's Provisions and Opposition's Objections

The Bill provides for fifty per cent of posts in the CAPFs to be filled by deputation in the rank of Inspector General, and a minimum of sixty-seven per cent of the posts to be filled by deputation in the rank of Additional Director General, and all posts in the ranks of Special Director General and Director General shall be filled by deputation only. The Opposition MPs flagged that the Bill goes against the Supreme Court judgment in 2025, which called for "the number of posts earmarked for deputation in the cadres of the CAPFs upto the level of Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) should be progressively reduced over a period of time, say within an outer limit of two years."

TMC MP's Protest in Rajya Sabha

Rajya Sabha also witnessed an exchange between Chairman Harivansh and TMC MP Derek O' Brien, when the member of the House decided to go for a silent protest against the Bill. O' Brien also flagged that he was granted only a minute to put forward his objections.

Derek O' Brien said, "We are objecting to this Bill. How much time do I have? Firstly, the Home Minister is not here. He is busy doing other things, and we are missing him. This is an anti-federal Bill. For the next 40 seconds, I will stand in silence to protest against the Bill and how democracy is being muzzled in this House. Are you giving me one minute? You are giving me some 'daan' (charity)... Silence is my right."

Replying to him, Chairman of the House, Harivansh, said, "One minute has been allotted for you to speak. Nothing is going on record now."

Government Defends Bill's Constitutionality

Meanwhile, MoS Home Nityanand Rai replied to the objections and said that the legislation does not go against the judiciary or judicial review. Rai told the House, "Under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, the Parliament is allowed to draft legislation on such matters related to national security and armed forces. The operations, duties and powers of the forces will be governed by the original Acts. There is no change expected in the consolidated funds. This Bill does not affect the established arrangement under Article 312. All the objections raised are not factually correct. This Bill does not limit judicial review and does not interfere with the judiciary's rights. It only aims to explain the administrative structure, recruitment, deputation and service-related arrangements."

The statement of objective also cites Article 312 and says, "Historically, Indian Police Service officers are an integral and important part of the Central Armed Police Forces, who have been serving on deputation along with officers and members of these Forces."

The financial memorandum of the Bill also mentions, "The provisions of the proposed legislation do not involve any expenditure, either recurring or non-recurring, from and out of the Consolidated Fund of India."

Rijiju Slams Opposition for Citing Judiciary

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju also slammed the Opposition for citing the apex court judgement, saying that the legislators were "giving up their responsibility" of drafting laws. He said, "Nityanand has explained that the legislative business is necessary. I mentioned in the BAC as well. Every time you refer to the Supreme Court judgment. Judiciary is mandated to interpret the laws, to arbitrate and pass judgments, but this nation is run by the spirit of the Constitution and laws passed by the Parliament and the Assemblies. How members are willingly giving up their own responsibilities. Parliament has absolute competence to make legislation empowered by the Constitution."

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)