The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the Bihar government's decision to continue a minister in office despite his not being elected within the six-month period prescribed under the Constitution, and sought an explanation from the state. A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant was hearing a plea seeking an early hearing of a petition challenging the reappointment of Deepak Prakash as Bihar's Panchayati Raj Minister despite his not being a member of either House of the state legislature.
Raising concerns over the constitutional validity of the arrangement, the Bench asked the Bihar government's counsel, "It is a pure legal issue. How are you retaining a minister beyond six months when he is not elected?" Under Article 164(4) of the Constitution, a person who is not a member of the legislature can be appointed a minister, but must secure election to the Assembly or Legislative Council within six months to continue in office.
Appearing for petitioner Rakesh Kumar Singh, counsel informed the court that when the matter was taken up on July 15, the Bihar government had sought time to file its counter-affidavit but had yet to do so. The petitioner's counsel submitted that more than seven months had elapsed since Prakash first assumed office and he continued to function as a minister without being elected. The Bench made it clear that it would not grant any further extension for filing the state's response and fixed August 4 as the next date of hearing.
According to the petition, Deepak Prakash, son of Rashtriya Lok Morcha (RLM) leader Upendra Kushwaha, was first sworn in as Panchayati Raj Minister on November 20, 2025, in the Nitish Kumar-led government despite not being a member of either the Bihar Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council. Following the formation of a new council of ministers after Nitish Kumar stepped down and Samrat Choudhary assumed office as Chief Minister, Prakash was again inducted as Panchayati Raj Minister on May 7, 2026.
The petitioner has argued that Article 164(4) provides only a one-time constitutional window for a non-legislator to serve as a minister and that the provision cannot be repeatedly invoked every time a new ministry is formed. The plea contends that Prakash ought to have secured election within six months of his initial appointment, between November 20, 2025, and May 20, 2026. It further alleges that the reappointment amounts to an attempt to bypass constitutional safeguards governing ministerial appointments and weakens the principles of representative democracy, parliamentary accountability and collective responsibility. The petition has sought a declaration that Prakash's reappointment and continuation as minister are unconstitutional, illegal and void, besides seeking directions restraining him from exercising the powers of the ministerial office.