Congress leader Kanhaiya Kumar has sparked controversy over comments he made during an election rally in Nagpur, Maharashtra, where he took aim at Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and his wife, Amruta Fadnavis.
During the rally, Kanhaiya criticised Fadnavis’s recent calls for a “dharma yudh,” or religious war, intended to counteract what the BJP calls "vote jihad." In his remarks, Kanhaiya questioned whether the responsibility of “saving religion” should rest on the public alone and suggested that politicians should lead by example if they encourage such a fight.
Kanhaiya pointed out that while the public is called upon to protect religious values, some political leaders’ families appear to be distant from the cause. He questioned why ordinary people are urged to take on the task while politicians’ families pursue different paths, often sending their children abroad for education.
His specific reference to Amruta Fadnavis, known for her presence on social media, added fuel to the fire. Kanhaiya remarked that it seemed contradictory to promote a fight for “dharma” while public figures close to these politicians engage in seemingly unrelated activities like making Instagram reels.
The comments drew a strong reaction from the BJP, with national spokesperson R.P. Singh condemned Kanhaiya’s words as a reflection of a “poor mentality.” Singh criticised Kanhaiya for making remarks about personal family matters and argued that such comments demonstrated a lack of respect.
According to Singh, involving a politician’s family in political discourse crosses boundaries of decency and reveals a negative approach by the Congress party. Singh went on to question Kanhaiya's credibility in discussing constitutional values, pointing to the Congress leader’s past connections with the “tukde-tukde” gang—a term used to label certain activists accused of divisive rhetoric in India.
Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Nirupam also criticised Kanhaiya’s remarks, calling them inappropriate and unnecessary. Nirupam stressed that such comments about women in a politician’s family were uncalled for and suggested that Kanhaiya should issue a public apology.
Nirupam added that the remarks were not only disrespectful but failed to acknowledge the progress women have made in society, as Amruta Fadnavis herself is an accomplished professional.
The incident sheds light on the escalating tension in Maharashtra’s election campaign, where personal and ideological clashes are becoming increasingly prominent. Kanhaiya’s remarks were a response to Devendra Fadnavis’s recent statements about “vote jihad” and the BJP’s call for a religious struggle, which Kanhaiya argued is an attempt to create divisions.
He stated that while leaders encourage people to protect “dharma,” they do not seem to require the same commitment from their own families, some of whom enjoy educational opportunities abroad or focus on professional pursuits outside of the political arena.
Kanhaiya’s comments are part of a larger pattern in his rhetoric, where he often questions the BJP’s stance on religious and social issues, accusing the party of using such issues to manipulate public sentiment.
According to Kanhaiya, these calls for religious loyalty and protection often serve as a distraction from more pressing issues affecting the public. By raising questions about the involvement of political leaders' families in these issues, he sought to emphasise what he sees as inconsistencies in their message.
The controversy over Kanhaiya’s comments reflects the high-stakes nature of Maharashtra's upcoming elections. The state is currently a battleground for competing ideologies, with BJP's focus on religious and nationalistic themes facing opposition from Congress and other parties who argue that these narratives divide rather than unify. As the debate over the role of religion in politics intensifies, both sides are attempting to frame the issues in ways that appeal to their base.
In response, BJP leaders have doubled down on their criticism of Kanhaiya, with Singh emphasising that such remarks do not align with Indian cultural values. Singh argued that a politician's family members should not be the subject of political attacks, regardless of their public roles. He also expressed concerns about the tone of the campaign, suggesting that personal insults could derail constructive dialogue on important issues.
Follow us
