Jagdeep Dhankhar Leaves Position as Vice President: A Political Earthquake in Indian Parliament

Vice Pres­i­dent Jagdeep Dhankhar’s sud­den res­ig­na­tion on July 21, 2025, sent shock­waves through Indi­a’s polit­i­cal estab­lish­ment and marked a defin­ing moment in the coun­try’s con­sti­tu­tion­al his­to­ry. His unex­pect­ed depar­ture from the nation’s sec­ond-high­est office, cit­ing health con­cerns, has trig­gered intense spec­u­la­tion about the deep­er rea­sons behind this unprece­dent­ed move.

The Dramatic Exit

On the evening of July 21, just hours after pre­sid­ing over the first day of Par­lia­men­t’s Mon­soon Ses­sion, Dhankhar sub­mit­ted his res­ig­na­tion to Pres­i­dent Droupa­di Mur­mu with imme­di­ate effect. In his let­ter, he stat­ed: “To pri­ori­tise health care and abide by med­ical advice, I here­by resign as Vice Pres­i­dent of India, effec­tive imme­di­ate­ly, in accor­dance with Arti­cle 67(a) of the Con­sti­tu­tion”.

The 74-year-old’s deci­sion came as a com­plete sur­prise to the polit­i­cal estab­lish­ment. Pres­i­dent Mur­mu for­mal­ly accept­ed the res­ig­na­tion on July 22, with the Min­istry of Home Affairs issu­ing a noti­fi­ca­tion con­firm­ing its imme­di­ate effect.

A Day of Unprecedented Developments

Dhankhar’s final day as Vice Pres­i­dent was marked by sig­nif­i­cant par­lia­men­tary pro­ceed­ings that may have con­tributed to his dra­mat­ic exit. Dur­ing his last sit­ting as Rajya Sab­ha Chair­man, he made sev­er­al cru­cial announce­ments, includ­ing the accep­tance of an impeach­ment motion against Del­hi High Court judge Jus­tice Yash­want Var­ma. This motion, signed by over 50 oppo­si­tion MPs, sought the judge’s removal in con­nec­tion with the con­tro­ver­sial cash recov­ery case from his res­i­dence ear­li­er in the year.

Hours before his res­ig­na­tion, Dhankhar had urged par­lia­men­tar­i­ans to reduce polit­i­cal acri­mo­ny, stat­ing: “A thriv­ing democ­ra­cy can­not sus­tain con­stant acri­mo­ny. Polit­i­cal ten­sion must be reduced, as con­fronta­tion is not the essence of pol­i­tics”. Iron­i­cal­ly, these words would prove to be his final pub­lic plea as the nation’s con­sti­tu­tion­al head.

The tim­ing raised eye­brows par­tic­u­lar­ly because his office had announced a sched­uled trip to Jaipur just hours before the res­ig­na­tion. This sud­den change of plans added to the mys­tery sur­round­ing his depar­ture.

Health Concerns: The Official Narrative

The offi­cial rea­son for Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion cen­tered on his dete­ri­o­rat­ing health con­di­tion. The Vice Pres­i­dent had under­gone angio­plas­ty at the All India Insti­tute of Med­ical Sci­ences (AIIMS) in Del­hi in March 2025, fol­low­ing a heart attack. He was admit­ted on March 9 and dis­charged on March 12 after the pro­ce­dure, with doc­tors advis­ing him to take ade­quate rest.

Recent reports revealed that Dhankhar had col­lapsed dur­ing an offi­cial event in Del­hi on July 17, just four days before his res­ig­na­tion. The inci­dent occurred while he was vis­it­ing a gar­den with his wife and Del­hi Lieu­tenant Gov­er­nor VK Sax­e­na, requir­ing urgent med­ical assis­tance. Addi­tion­al­ly, he had suf­fered anoth­er health scare dur­ing an offi­cial vis­it to Naini­tal in June, where he required first aid from local doc­tors.

His vis­i­ble frailty had become appar­ent in recent pub­lic appear­ances, with the Vice Pres­i­dent often deliv­er­ing speech­es while seat­ed rather than stand­ing. These health issues lent cred­i­bil­i­ty to the offi­cial expla­na­tion for his depar­ture.

Political Undercurrents and Speculation

Despite the offi­cial health-relat­ed expla­na­tion, polit­i­cal observers and oppo­si­tion lead­ers have sug­gest­ed deep­er rea­sons behind Dhankhar’s sud­den exit. The most sig­nif­i­cant the­o­ry relates to his han­dling of the judi­cial impeach­ment motions on his final day in office.

The Justice Varma Controversy

The impeach­ment motion against Jus­tice Yash­want Var­ma had become a polit­i­cal­ly sen­si­tive issue. The judge was embroiled in con­tro­ver­sy fol­low­ing the alleged recov­ery of a large amount of cash from his Del­hi res­i­dence dur­ing a fire inci­dent in March 2025. The Supreme Court had estab­lished a three-judge inquiry com­mit­tee that found “strong infer­en­tial evi­dence” against Jus­tice Var­ma and rec­om­mend­ed impeach­ment pro­ceed­ings.

The gov­ern­ment had ini­tial­ly planned to intro­duce the impeach­ment motion only in the Lok Sab­ha, with Par­lia­men­tary Affairs Min­is­ter Kiren Riji­ju coor­di­nat­ing the process. How­ev­er, Dhankhar’s accep­tance of a par­al­lel motion in the Rajya Sab­ha may have dis­rupt­ed this strat­e­gy, as con­sti­tu­tion­al pro­vi­sions require joint pro­ceed­ings when motions are filed in both hous­es simul­ta­ne­ous­ly.

Tensions with the Government

Reports emerged of sig­nif­i­cant ten­sions between Dhankhar and senior gov­ern­ment min­is­ters. Con­gress leader Jairam Ramesh revealed that Union min­is­ters JP Nad­da and Kiren Riji­ju had failed to attend a cru­cial Busi­ness Advi­so­ry Com­mit­tee meet­ing chaired by Dhankhar on the after­noon of July 21. This per­ceived snub may have been “the last straw” that trig­gered his res­ig­na­tion deci­sion.

Ramesh not­ed: “So some­thing very seri­ous hap­pened yes­ter­day between 1 PM and 4:30 PM to account for the delib­er­ate absence of Shri Nad­da and Shri Riji­ju”. The Con­gress leader sug­gest­ed that Dhankhar felt insult­ed by the min­is­ters’ unex­plained absence from the resched­uled meet­ing.

Opposition Reactions: Surprise and Skepticism

The oppo­si­tion’s response to Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion was notably sym­pa­thet­ic, despite their fre­quent con­flicts with him dur­ing his tenure. This shift in tone raised eye­brows, giv­en that the same par­ties had attempt­ed to impeach him just months ear­li­er.

Con­gress Gen­er­al Sec­re­tary Jairam Ramesh described the res­ig­na­tion as “shock­ing as it is inex­plic­a­ble” and stat­ed that “there are far deep­er rea­sons for his res­ig­na­tion”. He praised Dhankhar’s com­mit­ment to con­sti­tu­tion­al pro­pri­ety and his fear­less advo­ca­cy for farm­ers’ wel­fare.

Oth­er oppo­si­tion lead­ers echoed sim­i­lar sen­ti­ments. Con­gress MP Vivek Tankha ques­tioned whether Dhankhar’s “proac­tive han­dling” of the impeach­ment motions was “the last straw”. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Priyan­ka Chaturve­di, despite their past con­flicts, acknowl­edged the sud­den nature of his depar­ture.

A Controversial Tenure

Dhankhar’s near­ly three-year tenure as Vice Pres­i­dent was marked by fre­quent con­fronta­tions with oppo­si­tion par­ties and con­tro­ver­sial state­ments that often drew crit­i­cism. His time as Rajya Sab­ha Chair­man saw sev­er­al unprece­dent­ed inci­dents, includ­ing the mass sus­pen­sion of 146 oppo­si­tion MPs in Decem­ber 2023—the largest such action in Indi­an par­lia­men­tary his­to­ry.

Previous Conflicts

The Vice Pres­i­dent had faced sig­nif­i­cant oppo­si­tion crit­i­cism through­out his tenure. In Decem­ber 2024, oppo­si­tion par­ties had moved a his­toric no-con­fi­dence motion against him, mak­ing him the first Vice Pres­i­dent in Indi­an his­to­ry to face such a chal­lenge. Though the motion was ulti­mate­ly reject­ed by Deputy Chair­man Hari­vansh, it reflect­ed the deep polar­iza­tion his tenure had cre­at­ed.

His con­tro­ver­sial state­ments includ­ed dis­miss­ing oppo­si­tion con­cerns about farm­ers’ protests as “croc­o­dile tears” and open­ly prais­ing the Rashtriya Swayam­se­vak Sangh (RSS) as a “glob­al think tank”. These remarks often aligned him close­ly with the rul­ing par­ty’s ide­o­log­i­cal posi­tions, draw­ing crit­i­cism about his con­sti­tu­tion­al neu­tral­i­ty.

Background and Rise

Born on May 18, 1951, in Kithana vil­lage, Rajasthan, Dhankhar rose from hum­ble farm­ing ori­gins to become one of Indi­a’s most promi­nent legal and polit­i­cal fig­ures. After estab­lish­ing him­self as a senior advo­cate in the Supreme Court, spe­cial­iz­ing in steel, coal, min­ing, and inter­na­tion­al com­mer­cial arbi­tra­tion, he entered pol­i­tics and served as Gov­er­nor of West Ben­gal from 2019 to 2022.

His tenure as West Ben­gal Gov­er­nor was marked by fre­quent clash­es with Chief Min­is­ter Mama­ta Baner­jee’s gov­ern­ment, estab­lish­ing him as a com­bat­ive con­sti­tu­tion­al fig­ure even before his ele­va­tion to the Vice Pres­i­den­cy.

Constitutional Implications and Succession

Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion trig­gered imme­di­ate con­sti­tu­tion­al process­es for select­ing his suc­ces­sor. As per Arti­cle 68(2) of the Con­sti­tu­tion, the elec­tion must be held “as soon as pos­si­ble,” typ­i­cal­ly with­in 60 days of the vacan­cy. The new Vice Pres­i­dent will serve a full five-year term from the date of assum­ing office, rather than com­plet­ing Dhankhar’s remain­ing tenure.

Acting Chairman Arrangements

In the imme­di­ate after­math of Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion, Rajya Sab­ha Deputy Chair­man Hari­vansh Narayan Singh assumed respon­si­bil­i­ty for chair­ing the Upper House pro­ceed­ings. Hari­vansh, a Jana­ta Dal (Unit­ed) MP from Bihar, has served as Deputy Chair­man since 2018 and is well-regard­ed for his par­lia­men­tary exper­tise.

Election Process

The Vice Pres­i­dent is elect­ed by an elec­toral col­lege com­pris­ing all 788 mem­bers of both Hous­es of Par­lia­ment through a secret bal­lot using the sin­gle trans­fer­able vote sys­tem. The cur­rent par­lia­men­tary com­po­si­tion gives the BJP-led Nation­al Demo­c­ra­t­ic Alliance a clear major­i­ty, vir­tu­al­ly ensur­ing their can­di­date’s vic­to­ry.

Speculated Successors

Polit­i­cal cir­cles have begun spec­u­lat­ing about poten­tial suc­ces­sors, with sev­er­al promi­nent names emerg­ing as fron­trun­ners:

Lead­ing Con­tenders:

• Hari­vansh Narayan Singh: The cur­rent Deputy Chair­man, whose JD(U) affil­i­a­tion could strength­en NDA uni­ty ahead of Bihar elec­tions
• Nitish Kumar: Bihar Chief Min­is­ter, whose ele­va­tion could facil­i­tate BJP’s elec­toral strat­e­gy in the state
• JP Nad­da: Union Health Min­is­ter and out­go­ing BJP Pres­i­dent, bring­ing exten­sive orga­ni­za­tion­al expe­ri­ence
• Vasund­hara Raje: For­mer Rajasthan Chief Min­is­ter, rep­re­sent­ing the par­ty’s senior women lead­er­ship

Oth­er Pos­si­bil­i­ties:

• Raj­nath Singh: Union Defence Min­is­ter with exten­sive par­lia­men­tary expe­ri­ence
• Manoj Sin­ha: Jam­mu & Kash­mir Lieu­tenant Gov­er­nor
• Moham­mad Arif Khan: Bihar Gov­er­nor

Political Reactions and Analysis

The rul­ing BJP’s response to Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion was notably restrained. Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi wait­ed near­ly 15 hours before issu­ing a brief state­ment wish­ing Dhankhar “good health,” a delay that fueled fur­ther spec­u­la­tion about inter­nal ten­sions.

The mut­ed reac­tion from BJP lead­ers con­trast­ed sharply with their usu­al prac­tice of issu­ing imme­di­ate state­ments on sig­nif­i­cant polit­i­cal devel­op­ments. This silence was inter­pret­ed by many as con­fir­ma­tion that the res­ig­na­tion involved more com­plex polit­i­cal cal­cu­la­tions than the offi­cial health nar­ra­tive sug­gest­ed.

Historical Context

Dhankhar becomes only the third Vice Pres­i­dent in Indi­an his­to­ry to resign before com­plet­ing his term. The pre­vi­ous res­ig­na­tions were by V.V. Giri in 1969 and R. Venkatara­man in 1987, both of whom stepped down to con­test pres­i­den­tial elec­tions. Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion for health rea­sons rep­re­sents a unique prece­dent in Indi­an con­sti­tu­tion­al his­to­ry.

His depar­ture also marks the end of one of the most con­tro­ver­sial tenures in the Vice Pres­i­den­t’s office, char­ac­ter­ized by fre­quent con­sti­tu­tion­al con­fronta­tions and par­ti­san accu­sa­tions.

Impact on Parliamentary Proceedings

The imme­di­ate impact of Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion was felt in the ongo­ing Mon­soon Ses­sion of Par­lia­ment. The Rajya Sab­ha wit­nessed repeat­ed adjourn­ments and pro­ce­dur­al dis­rup­tions as mem­bers grap­pled with the sud­den lead­er­ship change. The oppo­si­tion used the oppor­tu­ni­ty to ques­tion the gov­ern­ment about the cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing the res­ig­na­tion.

The han­dling of pend­ing mat­ters, includ­ing the judi­cial impeach­ment motions that may have trig­gered his depar­ture, now falls to the act­ing arrange­ments and the incom­ing Vice Pres­i­dent.

Media and Public Response

The res­ig­na­tion gen­er­at­ed exten­sive media cov­er­age and pub­lic debate about the health of Indi­a’s demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions. News chan­nels pro­vid­ed con­tin­u­ous cov­er­age of the devel­op­ing sto­ry, with polit­i­cal ana­lysts offer­ing var­i­ous inter­pre­ta­tions of the events.

Social media plat­forms buzzed with spec­u­la­tion and con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries about the “real rea­sons” behind Dhankhar’s depar­ture. The hash­tag #Dhankhar­Resigns trend­ed on Twit­ter, reflect­ing pub­lic inter­est in under­stand­ing the full sto­ry behind this con­sti­tu­tion­al cri­sis.

Looking Ahead

As India nav­i­gates this con­sti­tu­tion­al tran­si­tion, sev­er­al key ques­tions remain unan­swered. The selec­tion of Dhankhar’s suc­ces­sor will be close­ly watched as an indi­ca­tor of the gov­ern­men­t’s polit­i­cal pri­or­i­ties and coali­tion man­age­ment strate­gies. The NDA’s choice could influ­ence upcom­ing state elec­tions, par­tic­u­lar­ly in Bihar, and shape the dynam­ics of the Rajya Sab­ha for years to come.

The cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing Dhankhar’s res­ig­na­tion may also prompt broad­er dis­cus­sions about the role and inde­pen­dence of con­sti­tu­tion­al offices in Indi­a’s par­lia­men­tary democ­ra­cy. Oppo­si­tion par­ties have already indi­cat­ed their inten­tion to con­tin­ue ques­tion­ing the gov­ern­ment about the true rea­sons behind this unprece­dent­ed depar­ture.

The res­ig­na­tion of Jagdeep Dhankhar rep­re­sents more than just a change in con­sti­tu­tion­al office—it high­lights the com­plex inter­play between health con­cerns, polit­i­cal ten­sions, and insti­tu­tion­al respon­si­bil­i­ties in mod­ern India. As the nation moves for­ward with select­ing his suc­ces­sor, the full impli­ca­tions of this dra­mat­ic polit­i­cal devel­op­ment will con­tin­ue to unfold, poten­tial­ly reshap­ing the coun­try’s con­sti­tu­tion­al and polit­i­cal land­scape for years to come.

The search for truth behind Dhankhar’s sud­den exit from the Vice Pres­i­den­t’s office serves as a reminder of the del­i­cate bal­ance required to main­tain Indi­a’s demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions while nav­i­gat­ing the intense pres­sures of con­tem­po­rary pol­i­tics. Whether dri­ven by gen­uine health con­cerns, polit­i­cal dis­agree­ments, or a com­bi­na­tion of fac­tors, his res­ig­na­tion marks a sig­nif­i­cant moment in Indi­a’s ongo­ing demo­c­ra­t­ic jour­ney.