Seven AAP Rajya Sabha MPs Join BJP, Spark Constitutional Debate Over Anti-Defection Law Merger Clause

Seven Rajya Sabha MPs of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) announced their merger with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on April 24, 2026, triggering a constitutional debate over the interpretation of the merger clause in the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution.

The defecting MPs — Raghav Chadha, Sandeep Pathak, Ashok Mittal, Harbhajan Singh, Rajinder Gupta, Swati Maliwal, and Vikramjit Sahney — constitute two-thirds of AAP’s strength in the Rajya Sabha, leaving the party with only three members in the Upper House. They claim immunity from disqualification under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule, which exempts legislators from disqualification if two-thirds of a legislature party agrees to a merger with another party.

However, the validity of their claim is under scrutiny, as the AAP maintains that no formal merger decision was taken by the party’s national leadership. The controversy centers on whether numerical strength alone can constitute a valid merger under the anti-defection law, or whether consent from the original political party is required.

Legal experts are divided on the issue. Chakshu Roy of PRS Legislative Research told The Indian Express that the MPs would not face disqualification, citing precedent from the tenure of former Rajya Sabha Chairman Venkaiah Naidu, when two-thirds of TDP members merged with the BJP and the Chairman approved the move.

In contrast, former Lok Sabha secretary general PDT Achary argued that since AAP has members in multiple legislatures, the Rajya Sabha Chairman can only consider the strength within the House he presides over, but the defectors’ action may still not qualify as a legitimate merger without the original party’s consent.

The AAP has submitted a disqualification plea to the Rajya Sabha Chairman against the defecting MPs, asserting that their action violates the spirit of the anti-defection law, which was designed to prevent opportunistic floor-crossing and preserve party discipline.

The anti-defection law, introduced via the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1985, aims to curb rampant defections that had destabilized state governments in the 1960s and 1970s. Its merger exception was intended to accommodate genuine party realignments, not to enable mass defections under the guise of merger.

The Rajya Sabha Chairman will now decide whether to accept the merger claim and allow the MPs to retain their seats, or refer the matter for adjudication. Legal observers suggest the dispute may ultimately require resolution by the Supreme Court to clarify the limits of the merger provision in the Tenth Schedule.

The development has broader implications for India’s anti-defection framework, raising questions about the potential misuse of the merger clause as a tool for defections rather than a safeguard against them.