1 August 2026
the news now

Supreme Court Questions Bihar Government Over Appointment of Unelected Minister

2 sources · India

Who reported this

  • The Indian Express India · Centre · Indian Express Group (Goenka family)
  • Hindustan Times India · Centre-right · HT Media (KK Birla group)

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • Hatched: the outlet is state-affiliated or state-controlled

Lean is where the outlet sits in its OWN country's politics, never on one global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

Ownership is disclosed, never rated.

Every source for this story reports from India.

The Supreme Court has questioned the Bihar government regarding the continuation of Minister Deepak Prakash in office despite him not being an elected member of the state legislature. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant asked how the state could retain a minister beyond the six month constitutional limit, describing the matter as a pure legal issue.

The court was hearing a petition filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh challenging the reappointment of Prakash as Panchayati Raj Minister. Prakash was first appointed on November 20, 2025, under the government of Nitish Kumar without being a member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly or Council. Following a change in government and the appointment of Samrat Choudhary as chief minister, Prakash was reappointed to his ministerial role on May 7, 2026.

The petitioner argues that Article 164(4) of the Constitution permits a non member to serve as a minister for a maximum of six months. Singh contends that the reappointment is an attempt to circumvent constitutional safeguards and undermines representative democracy. He further argued that only a small residual period remained from the original six month limit when Prakash was reappointed in May.

The Supreme Court stated it would not grant any more time for the state government to file a counter affidavit. The court has scheduled the next hearing for early August.

How each side framed it

Centre
Framed the event as a challenge to constitutional safeguards and an undermining of representative democracy.
Centre-right
Framed the event primarily as a legal question regarding the specific calculation of the permissible six month term.

Sources

Faithfulness score: 1.00 (fraction of claims supported by the sources, self-judged).