Mahua Moitra flags double standard on parliamentary abuse
Synopsis
TMC MP Mahua Moitra highlights that BJP MP Ramesh Biduri faced no FIR or suspension after abusing Danish Ali on the Lok Sabha floor in 2023, while a separate abuse case is allegedly being used to demand arrests — a pattern the opposition calls selective enforcement.
Key Takeaways
Ramesh Biduri , BJP MP from South Delhi , abused fellow MP Danish Ali inside the Lok Sabha during a 2023 session with no suspension or FIR filed.
TMC MP Mahua Moitra drew a direct contrast between that unpunished incident and what she says are arrest demands in a separate abuse case involving 'Ruchika'.
Lok Sabha rules have permitted the Speaker to suspend members for disorderly conduct since the 1950s , but opposition parties allege the power is applied selectively.
Moitra explicitly called for Union Home Minister Amit Shah to appear in Parliament, framing the controversy as a diversion from substantive accountability.
The Privileges Committee has rarely been invoked against ruling-coalition members despite repeated opposition demands, according to the broader parliamentary record.
A sitting Member of Parliament abused a colleague on the floor of the Lok Sabha — and walked away without suspension, without an FIR, without consequence. Now, TMC MP Mahua Moitra is asking why a separate abuse case is being treated as grounds for arrest. The contrast, she argues, exposes a pattern of selective enforcement that the opposition has been raising for years.
The 2023 Biduri-Danish Ali incident that started it all
Ramesh Biduri, the BJP Lok Sabha MP from South Delhi, made remarks inside the House targeting fellow MP Danish Ali that opposition members described as deeply offensive and communally charged. The incident, which occurred during a 2023 parliamentary session, triggered immediate demands from opposition benches for action under Lok Sabha's rules of procedure — rules that have empowered the Speaker to suspend members for grossly disorderly conduct since the 1950s. No suspension followed. No FIR was registered.Moitra's core charge: one law for the ruling party, another for the rest
Pointing to what she describes as a glaring inconsistency, Moitra contrasts the Biduri episode with the treatment of a case she refers to as 'Ruchika's abuse' — where, she alleges, an arrest has been demanded. The implicit argument is direct: if the floor of Parliament is not consequence-free for everyone, it should not be consequence-free for anyone. 'We want Amit Shah in Parliament, not these diversions,' she wrote, signalling that the opposition's priority remains accountability from the Union Home Minister on substantive governance questions, not what she frames as engineered distractions.Parliament's conduct rules and the Speaker's discretion
Lok Sabha's rules give the Speaker wide latitude to act on member misconduct — expunging remarks, naming a member, or moving a suspension motion. Opposition parties have argued for years that this discretion is applied unevenly, with the Privileges Committee rarely invoked against members of the ruling coalition. The broader pattern Moitra is tapping into is well-established: repeated opposition allegations that parliamentary discipline and criminal law are deployed selectively depending on which side of the aisle the offender sits. Whether the Lok Sabha Speaker or the Privileges Committee takes up either matter in the next session will be the clearest test of whether the double-standard charge has any institutional traction — or whether it remains, as the opposition fears, a question without an answer.Point of View
Making it a durable reference point every time a comparable case arises. By invoking Amit Shah's absence from Parliament in the same breath, she ties conduct accountability to the larger opposition demand for executive answerability — two threads that together frame the ruling side as both protected and evasive. The real test is whether the Privileges Committee or the Speaker acts; without that, the double-standard charge stays politically potent but institutionally unresolved.
NationPress
31 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Ramesh Biduri say about Danish Ali in Parliament?
Ramesh Biduri , BJP MP from South Delhi , made remarks targeting Danish Ali inside the Lok Sabha during a 2023 session that opposition members described as deeply offensive. The exact words were expunged from the record, but no FIR was filed and Biduri was not suspended.
Was any action taken against Ramesh Biduri after the Danish Ali incident?
No formal action was taken. Despite opposition demands for suspension under Lok Sabha rules and an FIR, Ramesh Biduri faced neither consequence after the 2023 incident involving Danish Ali .
Why is Mahua Moitra mentioning Amit Shah in this context?
Mahua Moitra is signalling that the opposition's primary demand is accountability from Union Home Minister Amit Shah in Parliament on governance matters, and that the current controversy is, in her view, a diversion from that core demand.
Can the Lok Sabha Speaker suspend an MP for abusive language?
Yes. Lok Sabha rules of procedure have empowered the Speaker to suspend members for grossly disorderly conduct since the 1950s . The Speaker can also refer matters to the Privileges Committee for further action.
What is the Privileges Committee of Lok Sabha?
The Privileges Committee is a parliamentary body empowered to examine cases of breach of privilege or contempt by members or others. Opposition parties have called for it to be invoked in cases of in-House misconduct, though it has rarely been used against ruling-coalition members in recent years.
