Opposition questions titles of Bills in Hindi

THe entry of Hindi phrases in the statute title of a young statute law triggered a tart confrontation in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday, with Opposition MPs accusing the Union government of departing from established parliamentary convention and constitutional safeguards governing legislative language. The objections were raised during the introduction of the Sabka Bima Sabki Raksha (Amendment of Insurance Laws) Bill, 2025, which Opposition members argued blurred the line between governance and political messaging.Leading the Opposition’s charge, RSP MP N K Premachandran argued that a bill’s title must clearly communicate its intent and substance to the public. “The title of a bill should convey its purpose and content. In this case, the title has no real connection with what the legislation seeks to address,” he said. Premachandran urged Speaker Om Birla to intervene on what he described as a growing trend of using Hindi in drafting and introducing legislation.The insurance bill seeks to allow foreign companies to own 100% in insurance firms in India, and usher improvements in the regulatory regime.Citing Article 348 of the Constitution, Premachandran noted that the authoritative text of bills introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament provides otherwise by law. He added that this requirement is “further reinforced” by the Official Languages Act, 1963. While translations in Hindi may be circulated for the benefit of MPs and the public, he argued that “the Constitution does not permit the mixing of languages or the insertion of Hindi expressions into the authoritative English text of a bill.”Trinamool Congress MP Sougata Ray echoed the objection, criticising what he termed the “Hindiisation” of legislation.Responding to the objections, Speaker Birla clarified that the authoritative language of the amendment bill remains English, though Hindi is also used alongside it. He added that decisions regarding the language and naming of legislation fall within the jurisdiction of the concerned ministry.The issue was later addressed by Union parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju, who dismissed the objections during a separate motion to introduce another bill. “It is well established that both Hindi and English are used for official purposes in the Union of India, and both are permissible,” he said. Rijiju further argued that invoking Article 348 and the Official Languages Act in this context was unnecessary, noting that objections to the introduction of bills are governed by Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Lok Sabha.