Senior Aam Aadmi Party leader and Leader of Opposition in the Delhi Assembly, Atishi, has firmly denied allegations that she made objectionable or disrespectful remarks about Sikh Gurus, stating that she has never done so inside the House or at any point in her life.
In a detailed reply submitted on Monday to the Privileges Committee of the Delhi Assembly, Atishi rejected the charge of breach of privilege and contempt, describing the notice issued to her as vague and baseless. She said she was being asked to respond to allegations that were neither clearly defined nor supported by specific details.
Addressing the Delhi Assembly Secretary, Atishi clarified that she never used the word “Guru” during the Assembly proceedings cited in the notice. Referring to the January 15, 2026 communication, which mentions an alleged statement made on January 6, she asserted that there was no reference, mention, or allusion to Sikh Gurus during her speech or conduct on that day.
“I state with complete sincerity that I have never made any derogatory comment against Sikh Gurus in the Assembly or anywhere in my life,” she said, categorically rejecting the accusations.
Context of the January 6 proceedings
Explaining the events of January 6, Atishi said the House witnessed a heated political exchange during the discussion on the Lieutenant Governor’s address, when Minister Ravindra Indraj Singh was moving the motion of thanks. Opposition MLAs, she said, were raising slogans and demanding a discussion on pollution before the LG’s address. She maintained that the debate, though noisy, had no reference whatsoever to Sikh Gurus.
Atishi also highlighted her personal reverence for Sikh traditions, saying that respect for Sikh Gurus is deeply ingrained in her family’s values. She referred to Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji as a symbol of sacrifice and human dignity, adding that she could never morally or ethically make disrespectful remarks about Sikh Gurus.
Seeks documents to respond fully
The AAP leader further stated that she never received any communication from the Speaker asking her to appear and clarify her position, contrary to what was mentioned in the notice. She pointed out that the allegations rely on broad phrases such as “disruption of proceedings” and “disturbance in the House” without specifying her exact words or actions.
Calling this a violation of the principles of natural justice, Atishi said the lack of particulars placed her in an impossible position. To submit a comprehensive and factual response, she has requested a copy of the complaint against her, the complete unedited and certified video recording of the January 6 Assembly proceedings, and any written communication from the Speaker seeking her explanation.
She said she would provide further clarification to the Privileges Committee after receiving these documents.