Forensic Question Withdrawn in Rajya Sabha Triggers Opposition Walkout: What Happened and Why It Matters
A parliamentary question on India’s forensic preparedness — including the strengthening of forensic laboratories and possible use of the Nirbhaya Fund — triggered a political flashpoint in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday after it was abruptly marked as withdrawn, leading to a walkout by Opposition members.
The incident unfolded during Question Hour in the Upper House and was widely reported by national media, raising questions about parliamentary accountability on forensic infrastructure at a time when new criminal laws increasingly mandate scientific evidence.
What Was the Forensic Question About?
The controversy centred on a Starred Question submitted by BJP Rajya Sabha MP Shri Aditya Prasad to the Ministry of Home Affairs. According to media reports, the question sought details on:
- Expansion and strengthening of Central Forensic Science Laboratories (CFSLs)
- Steps taken to enhance forensic capabilities in line with newly enacted criminal laws
- Whether funds, including allocations from the Nirbhaya Fund, were being used for forensic infrastructure such as DNA analysis and cyber-forensics
Starred Questions are significant because they require oral answers from ministers and allow MPs to ask supplementary questions, making them an important tool for legislative scrutiny.
What Happened in the House?
When Question Hour began on December 10, the Starred Question on forensics — originally listed — was shown as “withdrawn” in the official Question List/errata. The Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, C. P. Radhakrishnan, skipped the question and proceeded to the next item.
Opposition MPs immediately objected, seeking an explanation for the withdrawal of a question dealing with public safety and criminal justice. They argued that the House was being denied an opportunity to question the government on forensic readiness.
The Chairman ruled that a member has the right to withdraw their question under parliamentary rules and declined to allow further discussion on the procedural issue.
Following this ruling, Opposition members — led by the Congress — staged a walkout in protest.
Why Did the Opposition Walk Out?
Opposition leaders maintained that:
- Withdrawal of a Starred Question on a critical subject like forensic infrastructure should not happen without explanation on the floor of the House
- The move deprived Parliament of an oral ministerial response and follow-up questions
- Forensic capacity has direct implications for justice delivery, especially under new criminal laws that emphasise scientific evidence
Congress leaders were quoted in media reports saying the withdrawal reflected an attempt to avoid parliamentary scrutiny.
Was Any Reason Given for Withdrawing the Question?
As of the time of reporting:
- No public explanation was given in the House by the MP who withdrew the question
- No separate statement explaining the withdrawal was issued by the MP or the Ministry
- The Chairman’s response remained strictly procedural
This absence of explanation became a key point of contention for the Opposition.
Why Forensic Infrastructure Is a Key Issue Right Now
The incident comes at a time when forensic science has taken on greater legal importance in India:
- The government has approved the National Forensic Infrastructure Enhancement Scheme (NFIES), involving thousands of crores in investment
- New criminal laws emphasise forensic evidence, DNA analysis, and digital forensics
- Delays and backlogs in forensic labs have been repeatedly flagged in courts and parliamentary questions
- The Nirbhaya Fund has previously been used for strengthening forensic facilities, especially those related to crimes against women
Against this backdrop, the withdrawal of a Starred Question on forensic preparedness assumes greater significance.
How the Media Reported It
Major national outlets reported the walkout and the circumstances surrounding it:
PTI reported that the Opposition walked out after a BJP MP withdrew a question on enhancing forensic capabilities.
https://www.ptinews.com/story/national/opposition-walks-out-of-rajya-sabha-after-bjp-mp-withdraws-question/3175957
The Indian Express highlighted the link to the Nirbhaya Fund and the Congress protest.
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/congress-walks-out-after-nirbhaya-fund-question-withdrawn-in-rs-10414044/
Deccan Herald and The New Indian Express published similar accounts focusing on the procedural ruling and walkout.
https://www.deccanherald.com/india/opposition-walks-out-of-rajya-sabha-after-bjp-mp-withdraws-question-3826370
https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2025/Dec/11/opposition-walkout-after-bjp-mp-withdraws-question-on-indias-forensic-capabilities
NewsBytes summarised the episode and reactions.
https://www.newsbytesapp.com/news/politics/bjp-mp-withdraws-forensic-question-opposition-walks-out-of-rs/story
The official parliamentary record lists the MP as Shri Aditya Prasad, which is considered the authoritative spelling despite variations in media reports.
What Happens Next?
Parliamentary observers say the issue is unlikely to end with the walkout. Possible next steps include:
- Opposition MPs re-submitting the forensic question in unstarred or starred form
- Demands for a written reply from the Home Ministry
- Continued political debate on forensic preparedness as criminal law reforms are implemented
For now, the incident underscores how forensic science — often seen as a technical subject — has become a politically and legislatively sensitive issue in India’s criminal justice discourse.
Conclusion
The withdrawal of a forensic-related Starred Question and the subsequent Opposition walkout highlight growing tensions over transparency and accountability in Parliament. As India places greater reliance on scientific evidence in criminal investigations, questions around forensic infrastructure, funding, and implementation are likely to remain firmly in the political spotlight.
