<h1>Parliamentary disruptions over the President's address raise questions on ministerial answers, Speaker intervention, and institutional accountability.</h1> The dispute centres on parliamentary procedure during debate on the President's address: the opposition alleges the Prime Minister avoided answering questions in the Rajya Sabha and that recurring Lok Sabha disruptions demonstrate the government's refusal to run the House democratically. The Prime Minister countered that those disruptions insulted the President, the Constitution, and specified social groups, while the Speaker's reliance on intelligence to manage participation and the adequacy of that intervention were contested. The exchange implicates ministerial responsibility, acceptable protest in chambers, and oversight of executive conduct.