Singh’s expulsion raises two issues. One, the damage to the rule of law when short cuts to victimising opponents are passed off as principled fights against corruption. Singh too should know all about this. Five years ago, when he was chief minister, he had the then Akali chief and current Punjab chief minister, Parkash Singh Badal, arrested on charges of having accumulated thousands of crores while in office. Then too, these columns had underlined the same worry: that the government of the day would be insufficiently concerned with establishing a case for wrongdoing, and then acting upon it normally to win a conviction; it would instead influence the processes of justice. Obviously little has changed in Punjab’s politics.

Or has it? The second issue of discomfort in this episode is the choice of means adopted by the ruling party. By every appearance, the use of the legislature to remove Amarinder Singh from the House is undemocratic. Expulsion of a legislator should be saved for the rarest of rare cases. The Supreme Court has upheld Parliament’s power to expel a member, but also deemed this exercise to be open to judicial review. Is it healthy for legislatures to expose themselves to the possibility of rebuff? But a question, raised during the cash-for-votes expulsions in Lok Sabha, too remains. How far does such an exercise militate against the sovereign will of the people in electing their representatives? The last word on this development is far from said.