Article 196

Article 196 of the Constitution of India outlines the procedural framework for the introduction and passing of Bills in State Legislatures, particularly in states that have a bicameral legislature consisting of a Legislative Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) and a Legislative Council (Vidhan Parishad). This provision forms the constitutional foundation for the legislative process at the state level, ensuring transparency, coordination, and constitutional compliance in law-making.

Origin and Introduction of Bills

Under Article 196(1), a Bill may be introduced in either House of the State Legislature — the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council — unless it is a Money Bill or a Financial Bill, for which special provisions are laid down under Articles 198 and 207 respectively.
This arrangement mirrors the parliamentary procedure at the Union level, where legislative initiative is generally open, but financial legislation remains under the exclusive jurisdiction of the lower House.
The Legislative Assembly, being the directly elected body, represents the will of the people, whereas the Legislative Council acts as a revising chamber, providing expert scrutiny and considered debate. The dual-chamber system ensures a balance between representation and review in the legislative process.

Passing of Bills in a Bicameral Legislature

Article 196(2) prescribes that for a Bill to become law, it must be passed by both Houses of the State Legislature. The process generally involves three key stages in each House:

1. First Reading (Introduction): The Bill is formally introduced and published for members’ awareness.
2. Second Reading (Detailed Consideration): The Bill is examined clause by clause, and members may propose amendments.
3. Third Reading (Final Approval): The Bill, with or without amendments, is put to vote for final passage.

Once a Bill has been passed by one House, it is transmitted to the other House for consideration. If the second House agrees to the Bill without amendment, it is deemed to have been passed by both Houses. If the second House proposes amendments, those amendments must be agreed upon by the first House before the Bill can be deemed finally passed.
This system ensures collaboration and concurrence between the two legislative chambers, promoting more refined and balanced legislation.

Prorogation of the State Legislature

Under Article 196(3), the prorogation of the State Legislature — which refers to the temporary suspension of its session by the Governor — does not cause a Bill pending in either House to lapse.
This means that when the Legislature is reconvened after prorogation, pending Bills resume from the stage at which they were left. This rule upholds continuity in the legislative process, preventing unnecessary repetition of debates and deliberations.

Effect of Dissolution of the Legislative Assembly

The situation differs when the Legislative Assembly is dissolved, either at the expiry of its term or by an earlier order of the Governor:

• Bills pending in the Legislative Assembly, or Bills passed by the Assembly but still pending in the Legislative Council, lapse upon dissolution.
• Bills pending in the Legislative Council, which have not yet been passed by the Assembly, do not lapse.

This distinction underscores the supremacy of the Legislative Assembly in the bicameral structure. Since the Assembly represents the electorate directly, its dissolution signifies a complete reset of the legislative process for pending Bills originating or approved by it.
When a Bill lapses due to dissolution, it must be reintroduced afresh in the new Assembly following general elections, ensuring that only the current representatives of the people deliberate and decide on legislative matters.

Related Constitutional Provisions

Several other articles complement Article 196 by addressing specific legislative situations:

• Article 197: Provides for procedures in case of disagreement between the two Houses over ordinary Bills.
• Article 198: Specifies the special procedure for Money Bills, which can only be introduced in the Legislative Assembly.
• Article 207: Governs Financial Bills, outlining restrictions on their introduction and passage.

Together, these provisions establish a detailed procedural framework governing every stage of state legislation.

Judicial Interpretations and Case Law

Judicial interpretation has clarified the status of pending Bills and the constitutional boundaries of the legislative process under Article 196. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have emphasised that:

• Both Houses must concur on the final text of a Bill for it to be validly passed.
• The Governor’s assent under Article 200 is the final constitutional requirement for a Bill to become an Act.
• Bills pending due to prorogation do not lapse, ensuring legislative efficiency and continuity.

Through these rulings, the courts have reinforced the procedural sanctity and democratic intent of the Article.

Legislative Process and Practical Implementation

In practice, the passage of a Bill under Article 196 involves the following stages:

1. Drafting and Introduction: The Bill is prepared by the concerned department or member and introduced in one House.
2. Consideration by Committees: It may be referred to a select committee or joint committee for detailed examination.
3. Debate and Voting: Members debate the provisions and vote on proposed amendments.
4. Transmission Between Houses: The Bill passes from one House to another for concurrence.
5. Governor’s Assent: After passage by both Houses, the Bill is presented to the Governor for assent under Article 200.

If both Houses are in agreement, the Bill becomes law upon receiving the Governor’s assent. If not, the procedures in Article 197 apply to resolve the deadlock.

Significance and Purpose

Article 196 is crucial in preserving bicameral balance and legislative accountability. It ensures that:

• Both Houses contribute to law-making, combining democratic representation with deliberative scrutiny.
• The Legislative Council acts as a revising chamber, improving the quality of legislation by identifying practical and legal concerns.
• Legislative processes remain transparent and constitutionally consistent, even in times of prorogation or dissolution.

In states with a unicameral legislature, such as Kerala or West Bengal, Article 196 operates in a simplified form, since all Bills are introduced and passed solely by the Legislative Assembly.

Practical Implications and Continuity

The non-lapsing of Bills due to prorogation ensures that legislative work is not disrupted by sessional breaks, facilitating continuity. However, dissolution of the Assembly resets the legislative agenda, reaffirming the principle that law-making power derives from the mandate of the electorate.
In modern practice, Article 196 has significant implications for the timing and management of legislative business, particularly when elections or political transitions are imminent. Legislatures often expedite pending Bills before dissolution to avoid the need for reintroduction in the new term.

Democratic and Institutional Importance

Article 196 embodies the spirit of democratic federalism by granting state legislatures procedural autonomy while maintaining uniformity with parliamentary practice. It provides constitutional legitimacy to the entire legislative process, from introduction to passage, ensuring that every law enacted by a State Legislature rests on procedural propriety, democratic consensus, and constitutional continuity.