How has the Anti-Defection Law impacted the relationship between political parties and individual legislators in India? In light of the recent incidents also discuss the unintended consequences it has on the functioning of democracy in India.

Recently in dealing with Maharashtra defection crisis, Supreme Court distinguished between the legislative party and political party putting more emphasis on latter. 10th schedule beyond 52nd Amendment of Constitution was aimed to curtail anti-defection power in legislature working and stop phenomenon of legal form. It has altered the shape and discourse of petty altogether. Issue-ticket to candidate: Political party whip of the political party at they would have considered to be defected. Earlier individual legislators are accountable to those who voted them but now they are accountable solely to their political party. Example, they cannot raise individual voice against kill and have to toe the party line. Even after disqualification they can contest elections if other party gives their ticket.

Thus, now the individual legislators have to follow the whip of the political party at they would have considered to be defected. Earlier individual legislators are accountable to those who voted them but now they are accountable solely to their political party. Example, they cannot raise individual voice against kill and have to toe the party line. Even after disqualification they can contest elections if other party gives their ticket. Other unintended consequences: 1) Created partisan role for speaker in deciding against defection cases where can only political parties can raise petition. 2) Defections have not stopped rather parties with more money power to win elections have strengthened (though selection). 3) Individual legislators cannot give independent opinion in legislature assembly Thus 2nd APC, Dinesh Bosawami have called for reform in 10th schedule there is a need to restore it giving above challenges.