Gehlot lashes out at the Sangh and BJP again
Conditions being created akin to those in China
The Sunday Mail
New Delhi: Former Rajasthan Chief Minister and senior Congress leader Ashok Gehlot has opened a front against the BJP and the Sangh. Attacking the Sangh and the BJP for the second consecutive day, Gehlot stated that the country has effectively become a Hindu nation; only the formal declaration remains, as all other religions have been suppressed and people are remaining silent out of fear. Gehlot remarked that it was in view of these circumstances that he had said—had Indira Gandhi been alive today, she would have banned the activities of the BJP and the RSS. He noted that the BJP is rattled by this statement, which is why party leaders are constantly issuing defensive reactions. While speaking to journalists in Jaipur, Gehlot even detailed the specific Act under which such a ban could be imposed.
The BJP has gone on the offensive against Gehlot, from Delhi to Rajasthan. Gehlot’s remarks come just as his leader, Rahul Gandhi, is arriving in Kota on Wednesday for a one-day visit. Rahul is scheduled to address a student conference there regarding the issue of paper leaks. The Congress party is set to launch a nationwide movement concerning student issues, starting from Rajasthan. While Gehlot’s statements have heated up the political atmosphere in Rajasthan, BJP leaders at the central level are also targeting him; this marks the first time the BJP has launched such an aggressive attack. Gehlot stated that the opposition members criticizing his remarks are not speaking of their own volition but are being made to speak by their superiors. “I am merely asking what our laws and Constitution say about this matter. When my leader Rahul Gandhi speaks of protecting the Constitution, you accuse him of tearing it to shreds!” Gehlot cited Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951, noting that it strictly prohibits any candidate or their agent from soliciting votes based on religion, caste, community, or religious symbols. Doing so is considered a violation of the law; yet, this law is being flouted.
Section 123(3A) of the RPA, 1951: Promoting hatred, ill-will, or hostility between different communities on the grounds of religion or caste during an election is deemed a ‘corrupt practice’—a most solid legal ground for setting aside a winning election result. Section 29A(5) of the RPA, 1951: This mandates that any political party, at the time of registration, must pledge allegiance to the country’s Constitution and to secularism; no new party can be registered without this undertaking.
It is worth noting that since this Election Commission of India (ECI) guideline was introduced in 2005, parties that had already come into existence—such as the Akali Dal, AIMIM, and AIML, which were originally formed based on religion or community—were not affected by it. However, under current laws, no new party can be formed in such a manner.
Gehlot cites the 1995 ‘Shiv Sena case’: The Supreme Court delivered a landmark verdict after a candidate allegedly delivered a highly religious speech during an election campaign. The Court set aside the election victory and barred the individual concerned from contesting elections for six years.
He also refers to the 1995 ‘Dr. Dasrao Deshmukh case’ (Nanded): During the Lok Sabha elections, the Bombay High Court ruled that the display of religious slogans and communal posters on rally vehicles—with the candidate’s consent—constituted a ‘corrupt practice,’ and consequently set aside the candidate’s parliamentary election victory. Just consider this: a court in the country had actually annulled a parliamentary election! Take the year 1995 (the Manohar Joshi case): in this instance, too, the court set aside his election victory, although he later obtained relief from the Supreme Court on a technical point—that is a separate legal matter. Then there is the case of Bhairon Singh Shekhawat (1995–96), which I mentioned yesterday as well; he faced legal proceedings over allegations regarding the use of symbols associated with the Ram Mandir and Goddess Lakshmi during election rallies. Although the Supreme Court eventually dismissed the petition, he had found himself in a precarious position at the High Court stage, having already become Chief Minister after winning the 1993 election. Regarding Union Home Minister Amit Shah (2014): following the Muzaffarnagar riots, he was held responsible for inciting communal tension due to remarks made during rallies in Western Uttar Pradesh—specifically, statements about “avenging insults through votes”—and the Election Commission imposed a nationwide ban on his campaigning at the time. Similarly, Uttar Pradesh CM Yogi Adityanath faced a three-day campaign ban in 2019 due to a specific statement. There are numerous such examples; therefore, what I have stated is based on facts.Gehlot states that history bears witness to the fact that Indira Gandhi was such a formidable and courageous leader that she decisively defeated Pakistan and secured the liberation of Bangladesh. She remained undeterred even by America’s Seventh Fleet, which withdrew despite its threats. Yet, look at the current times! Our Prime Minister Modi bows down to America when it comes to foreign policy. What has happened to our diplomatic influence on the global stage? The point is that given the grave situation emerging in the country today, if the BJP remains in power, they will gradually steer the nation down the path taken by China—where elections are held merely for the sake of appearances, but democracy ceases to exist in reality. Their Home Minister, Amit Shah, has himself declared from public platforms that “we will rule for the next 50 years.” I want to ask him: are you a soothsayer? It is the party that the people of the country elect that gets to rule; that is a distinct democratic process. However, such statements are being made because a dictatorial mindset has taken root in your minds; you have no faith in democracy or the wisdom of the people. That is precisely why the strategy of ‘Saam-Daam-Dand-Bhed’ (persuasion, bribery, punishment, and division) is clearly evident in your entire style of functioning and conduct—and it is on this basis that you are wielding power. This is my unequivocal view.
