Fact Check: Modi Government's Women's Quota Amendment Bill Defeated in Parliament Vote

**TL;DR:** The vote on the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 saw 298 MPs in favour and 230 against, confirming the bill’s defeat. This marks the first major legislative loss for the Narendra Modi‑led government since 2014, although a similar stall occurred in 2012.

**Claim 1:** In the vote on the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026, 298 members voted in favour and 230 voted against. Evidence: Parliamentary records show that 528 members were present and voting, with 298 supporting the bill and 230 opposing it. The tally fell short of the two‑thirds majority needed for a constitutional amendment. Verdict: True Analysis: The numbers match multiple news reports and the official count, confirming the claim.

**Claim 2:** This vote represents the first occasion since 2014 that the Narendra Modi‑led government has failed to secure passage of a constitutional amendment bill. Evidence: The bill’s defeat is the first time a constitutional amendment bill introduced by the Modi government has not passed since it took office in 2014. Earlier records indicate that the 115th Constitutional Amendment Bill (related to GST) stalled in 2012, before the current government’s term. Verdict: Mostly true Analysis: While a constitutional amendment bill did stall in 2012, no such failure occurred under the Modi administration until this vote, making the statement largely accurate in context.

**Claim 3:** The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 was tabled in parliament by the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Evidence: The bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha as a government measure, with officials describing it as moved by the Union Government under Prime Minister Modi’s leadership. Verdict: True Analysis: The sponsorship by the ruling coalition is explicitly noted in parliamentary proceedings and media coverage.

Watch for the government’s next steps on women’s reservation, including possible revisions to the bill or alternative legislative routes.