Vice President Jagdeep Dhan Khar resigned, as soon as the news ended on the entire political scenario as an unexpected silence. This sudden resignation of the tune raised many questions on the balance of the functioning of constitutional institutions, power and political morality. A few hours before the commencement of the Manson meeting of Parliament on Monday, July 21, 2025, when the political rank is intensifying and the tension between the judiciary and the Legislature is exposed, an active and controversial vice -president’s sudden departure cannot be a minor incident. The question is not why the dance dance resigned? The question is, what did this resignation cover?
Apparently, he laid the foundation for “health reasons”, but the person who is meeting with Parliament a few hours ago, is chairing the Business Advisory Committee the next day, and who is making open statements to the judiciary in recent times is not calm. Therefore, from Congress to constitutional experts, all will not be ready to accept all events as only a medical decision.
The behavior of Jagdeep Dhan Khar as the President of Rajya Sabha was quite different from his predecessors. They became an active, speaking, critic and sometimes exaggerated character rather than traditional constitutional silence. He repeatedly criticized the judiciary, especially called the Collegium system a transparent and hypocritical domination. Their situation was that the Legislature should have an increase in the decision and the courts should not go beyond the scope of the interpretation of the law. This was an important but dangerous statement that increased the stress already existing between the Legislature and the judiciary.
His critics believe that he often seems to protect the government’s position by renounced his neutrality in the Rajya Sabha. On several occasions, opposition members were severely criticized for restricting the voice or turning on the debate. In a constitutional situation, he used to comment several times on the judiciary and the opposition that the question was raised whether the tunes were meeting the moral and fair needs of this situation or they were promoting an ideological agenda?
His attitude came to light when he recently criticized a Supreme Court verdict in the Rajya Sabha and a formal proceedings included the resolution against a senior judge on the demand of the opposition, which was the first time. Observers say this moment was the basis of his resignation, as he had created concern in the circles of power.
The letter to the President to the President has been mentioned in medical advice, but the time and style are such as someone has gone out of the stage in a hurry, quietly, without the possibility of returning. And this phase was the constitutional center of the country. Congress leader Ram Ramesh has commented on a realistic and realistic remarks that this resignation is as shocking as it is. Perhaps there is no need to say more.
It is also important that the names such as the results Kumar and Raj Nath Singh began immediately after the resignation of Dhan Khari, which indicates the possibility that the resignation is not a personal step, but part of a defined political strategy.
Senior opposition leader Kapil Sabal expressed respect for his personal relations and his resignation, called him nationalist and patriotism. Acception states that the personality of the tune was not only a political activist, but a complex and contradictory role where he sometimes defended constitutional domination and sometimes killed the spirit of the same constitution.
The fact is that the resignation of Jagdeep Dhan Khar is not a personal decision of any person, it is a symbol of the internal conflict of Indian democracy where the institutes are mutual and dominate the posts of ideology. His departure has left the question whether constitutional posts in this system have become only formal seats or have any importance or interest?
Jagdeep Dhan Khar’s resignation is not just one -page letter. It is on the margins of history that reminds that the battle of constitutional dignity, democratic differences and institutional sovereignty has continued for a long time.
[email protected]
Click here to join us on social media. Click 👉 https://bit.ly/folkrrs
