ADR Report Explained: Nearly Half of India’s Ministers Face Criminal Charges, Reveals Deep-Rooted Criminalisation of Politics

ADR Report 2024 reveals that 47% of Indian ministers have a criminal background and 27% face serious offences — tracing the journey from the Vohra Committee to today’s data, uncovering how India’s political landscape continues to intertwine crime, cash, and electoral power.

• A recent report by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has once again brought to light the alarming extent of criminalisation of politics in India — a phenomenon referring to the entry and participation of individuals with criminal backgrounds in political and electoral processes.

• According to the findings, nearly 47% of India’s Ministers, including members of the Union Cabinet, State Cabinets, and Union Territories, have declared criminal cases against themselves.

• Even more concerning, 27% of these cases are categorised as serious offences — involving charges such as murder, attempted murder, kidnapping, and crimes against women.

Background and Context

• The report’s release comes amid the Centre’s introduction of three new bills that propose the automatic removal of the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, or Ministers detained for 30 consecutive days on serious criminal charges (offences punishable with five years or more).

• This move aligns with long-standing debates on political accountability and criminalisation.

  • The Vohra Committee Report (1993) had earlier highlighted the dangerous nexus between politicians, criminals, and bureaucrats, warning how criminal elements infiltrate governance to secure immunity and legitimacy, while political parties leverage them for financial and muscle power.

Key Findings from the ADR Report

The ADR analyzed self-sworn affidavits of 643 ministers from 27 State Assemblies, 3 Union Territories, and the Union Council of Ministers.

Parameter	Data
Total Ministers Analyzed	643
Ministers with Criminal Cases	302 (47%)
Ministers with Serious Criminal Cases	174 (27%)

Party-wise Breakdown

Party	Total Ministers	With Criminal Cases	%	Serious Cases	%
BJP	336	136	40%	88	26%
Congress	61	45	74%	18	30%
DMK	31	27	87%	14	45%
Trinamool Congress	40	13	33%	8	20%
TDP	23	22	96%	13	57%
AAP	16	11	69%	5	31%

• At the Union Government level, 29 of 72 Ministers (40%) have declared criminal cases.

• States with High Criminal Background (≥60%) include Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Bihar, Odisha, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Punjab, Telangana, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, and Puducherry.

• States with No Criminal Cases are Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland, and Uttarakhand.

Financial Profile: Wealth Concentration in Politics

The ADR report also evaluated the financial background of ministers and found staggering economic inequality among them.

• Total assets declared: ₹23,929 crore

• Average assets per minister: ₹37.21 crore

• Assemblies with billionaire ministers: 11

States with Billionaire Ministers:

• Karnataka – 8

• Andhra Pradesh – 6

• Maharashtra – 4

• Arunachal Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana, Telangana – 2 each

• Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab – 1 each

At the Union level, 6 of 72 ministers (8%) are billionaires.

Party-wise Billionaire Distribution:

• BJP – 14 (4%)

• Congress – 11 (18%)

• TDP – 6 (26%)

• Other parties (AAP, Janasena, JD(S), NCP, Shiv Sena) – a few each

Top 3 Richest Ministers:

1. Dr. Chandra Sekhar Pemmasani (TDP) – ₹5,705 crore

2. D. K. Shivakumar (Congress, Karnataka) – ₹1,413 crore

3. N. Chandrababu Naidu (TDP, Andhra Pradesh CM) – ₹931 crore

This vast financial disparity, coupled with the high number of criminal cases, underscores the fusion of wealth and crime in Indian politics — a structural issue that fuels institutionalised corruption (corruption embedded within political and bureaucratic systems).

Causes Behind Criminalisation of Politics

Several interrelated factors contribute to this entrenched issue:

1. Politico-Criminal Nexus — Criminals join politics to gain legal immunity, while political parties use them for muscle and money power, forming a mutual-benefit cycle.

2. “Winnable” Candidates — ADR 2024 data shows candidates with criminal records have a 15.3% success rate, compared to only 4.4% for those with clean records.

3. High Cost of Elections — Political campaigns rely heavily on black money and funds from illegal sources.

4. Slow Judicial Process — Delays in trials and poor conviction rates fail to deter parties from fielding tainted candidates.

   • ADR notes a 55% rise in MPs with criminal records since 2009.

5. Identity Politics — Voters often prioritise caste, religion, or regional loyalty over criminal history.

Impacts of Criminalisation

• Loss of Credibility: Undermines faith in democratic institutions.

• Law-Breakers as Law-Makers: Criminals in office can influence legislation for self-interest.

• Unfair Electoral Competition: Honest candidates face unequal ground.

• Institutionalised Corruption: Governance becomes driven by money and patronage instead of merit.

Legal and Constitutional Provisions

Representation of the People Act, 1951

• Section 8: Disqualifies individuals convicted of crimes with imprisonment of two years or more.

• Section 11: Empowers the Election Commission (EC) to remove or reduce disqualification periods (e.g., Prem Singh Tamang case, 2019).

Recent Legislative Initiatives

• 130th Constitutional Amendment Bill: Seeks to amend Articles 75 and 164. It proposes that a Minister arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days for an alleged offense punishable with imprisonment of at least five years, shall be removed from office.

Judicial Pronouncements

1. Union of India v. ADR (2002): Directed the Election Commission of India (ECI) to obtain affidavits from candidates declaring all criminal charges.

2. Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013): Mandated immediate disqualification of legislators convicted for two or more years.

3. Public Interest Foundation v. Union of India (2019): Required political parties to publish criminal records of their candidates across media platforms.

Way Forward

Experts and civil society groups advocate comprehensive reforms to address the deep-rooted criminalisation of Indian politics:

• Enhanced Penalties for False Affidavits: As per the 244th Law Commission Report (2014), punishment should be raised to at least two years and made a ground for disqualification.

• Dedicated Election Benches: High Courts should fast-track election-related cases to ensure timely convictions.

• Review of Section 11, RPA 1951: Prevent the Election Commission from reducing disqualification periods in cases of serious crimes.

• Financial and Transparency Reforms: Bring political parties under the RTI Act (2005) to ensure public accountability.

Analytical Insights and Conclusion

The ADR report serves as a mirror to Indian democracy — revealing how criminalisation and wealth concentration coexist within political power structures. Despite periodic judicial interventions and proposed constitutional amendments, the politico-criminal nexus continues to thrive.

Reforms in electoral financing, judicial efficiency, and voter education are urgently needed. Without these, India risks perpetuating a system where law-breakers continue to make the laws — eroding the very foundation of democratic governance.

Explore more on UPSC Content

Click for Daily Quotes:

Stay updated with the latest news by joining our Telegram channel – The PRESS Pad , and follow us on Instagram.