Jaipur: Congress state president Govind Singh Dotasra Friday criticised the Rajasthan Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Property for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Bill, 2026, during a debate in the assembly, alleging that the govt was trying to polarise voters and adopt a “Gujarat model” by introducing such legislation.Speaking during the discussion on the bill, Dotasra said the Congress would repeal the law if it returned to power in the state in 2028. “The govt is trying to create religious polarisation and bring such bills to consolidate majority votes. In 2028, when the Congress forms the govt, we will scrap this bill,” he said.Dotasra alleged that the legislation was an attempt by the govt to interfere in citizens’ constitutional rights, particularly the right to buy and sell property. “The right to purchase and sell property comes from the Constitution. The govt trying to control this is nothing but a conspiracy to disturb peaceful areas and promote corruption,” he said.He questioned how the govt would determine which areas would be declared “disturbed” and which communities would be targeted. “Which areas will be called disturbed? Which community do you want to identify through this bill? The intent behind the law must be clearly stated, but it was not done,” he said.Referring to provisions in Section 5 of the bill, Dotasra claimed the rules could open doors to corruption because property transfers in notified areas would require approval from a designated authority. He also argued that such provisions could make it difficult for citizens to challenge decisions.Congress MLA Rafeek Khan also opposed the bill during the debate, alleging that it could be misused for political reasons. He claimed that areas where Congress received more votes could be labelled as “disturbed areas”.“The only parameter to declare a disturbed area will be places where the Congress gets more votes,” Khan said. “This bill is not good for communal harmony and its provisions will make it difficult for people to sell property.”Khan rejected the argument that migration from certain neighbourhoods was due to communal tensions. “People move for many reasons. When families grow, they sell property and move elsewhere. Linking migration to other factors is not correct,” he said.
