English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Nitish Kumar-led JD(U) joins NDA, warns Sharad Yadav of action if he joins RJD rally

Published

9 years ago

on

Nitish Kumar-led JD(U) joins NDA, warns Sharad Yadav of action if he joins RJD rally

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Nitish Kumar-led JD(U) formally joined BJP’s NDA with a resolution to this effect adopted by the party’s national council today at the chief minister’s residence in Patna.

At the same time, the rebel JD(U) leader Sharad Yadav, who is opposed to Nitish Kumar’s decision to form an alliance government with the BJP, held a parallel function to show his strength in the state capital. The split is all but formalised, and they plan to approach the Election Commission to claim the JD(U) symbol, arrow.

Some JD(U) MPs loyal to Nitish Kumar are likely to be inducted in Union Council of Ministers, with at least one of them getting cabinet rank. A reshuffling of the portfolios in the union cabinet is in order due to the resignations of Manohar Parrikar (who became Goa CM) and Venkaiah Naidu (who became the Vice President) and the death of Anil Madhav Dave, the Environment and Forests Minister.

Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is also likely to get a key role in the NDA – such as the co-convener of the BJP-led alliance. JDU has two MPs in the Lok Sabha and seven out of its nine Rajya Sabha MPs are with Nitish Kumar.

The move comes weeks after Kumar broke ties with the Grand Alliance parties, Congress and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), in the state and re-formed the government with the support of the BJP. The Grand Alliance or ‘Mahagathbandhan’ had been formed ahead of the Bihar Assembly elections in 2015 to counter the BJP.

Sharad Yadav, estranged from Nitish Kumar over his alliance with the BJP, skipped the meeting where he had been invited to voice his views about the alliance. He reached Patna, but to attend a meeting convened by about two dozen JD (U) leaders who were suspended because they were seen with him during his tour of three districts.

Nitish Kumar-led JD(U) joins NDA, warns Sharad Yadav of action if he joins RJD rally

Sharad Yadav put on notice

Yadav, who had co-founded the JD (U), was removed as leader of the party in the Rajya Sabha for speaking against the alliance with the BJP. He hasn’t been suspended by Nitish Kumar’s party so far, but the JD(U) led by Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar on Saturday virtually put him Yadav on notice, hinting at action against him if he attends RJD chief Lalu Prasad’s rally on August 27.

JD(U) general secretary KC Tyagi was reported as saying that the party has not acted against Yadav for his “anti-party activities” because of his seniority and long association with the party. “If he attends RJD chief Lalu Prasad’s rally here on August 27, he will cross the Lakshman Rekha,” he said, and hinted at action against him.

Tyagi said that Yadav has left the party “on his own” and is “no longer with us, emotionally or physically”.

He accused Yadav of indulging in anti-party activities by holding separate meetings with his own supporters and RJD members. He claimed Yadav had always taken a stand against Nitish, “whether it is on demonetisation, surgical strikes and women’s reservation. He always took a different stand and went to the extremes”.

Tyagi maintained there was no split as the entire JD(U) was with party president and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar. He said heads of 16 state committees were with Nitish Kumar, contrary to claims made by the rival group.

He said in Bihar all 71 party MLAs, 30 MLCs and two Lok Sabha MPs and most of the Rajya Sabha MPs were with Nitish Kumar-led JD(U), except Sharad Yadav and Ali Anwar.

Sharad Yadav faction’s ‘Jan Adalat’ meeting

The rival, Sharad Yadav camp, held a ‘Jan Adalat’ meeting in Patna after Yadav landed in the city to be received with slogans in support of his faction and against Kumar. Yadav claims his faction of the party is the genuine unit.

As the rival groups held their meetings in Patna, a poster war in Patna city between the two JD(U) factions took an ugly turn when about a dozen bikers broke security cordons and managed to reach Rajendra Chowk just outside the chief minister’s residence where a meeting of the JD-U national executive committee was underway.

The workers backing Sharad Yadav waved JD(U) flags and shouted slogans against Nitish Kumar. The bikers clashed with JD(U) workers, who alleged that these were actually RJD workers disguised as Sharad Yadav’s supporters.

At the ‘Jan Adalat’ meeting of his camp, Sharad Yadav said, “There is unemployment in the country today. Youths are having no work. PM promised in 2014 that 2 crore people would get jobs but till date nothing has happened. In democracy, what one says and promises is important. Farmers are committing suicide in thousands. In the name of love jihad, people are being killed today.”

“Since the split of the Mahagathbandhan, I have been touring the entire country, which is in a difficult situation today. The flood situation in Bihar is also very bad. In the last 70 years, the situation in the country has not changed… In Una, Dalits were beaten for skinning cows. This is the state of affairs in the country.”

JD(U) MP Ali Anwar  said, “Our target and agenda is not any person (Nitish and PM Modi), but the country is seeing farmers, who predominantly feed the population, commit suicide… I appeal to the Muslims. There is fear among Muslims today. Dalits are insecure. There is massive turmoil in the country’s universities today. Nitish is looking like a dwarf today who once attained a high stature when he became the chief minister of the Mahagathbandhan in 2015.”

The rebel JD(U) programme follows a mega meeting of anti-BJP parties held recently in the national capital, which they said, was to save the “composite culture” of the country.

The party’s former national general secretary Arun Kumar Srivastava, who was expelled after the JD(U) legislator in Gujarat voted against the NDA candidate in the recent vice-presidential polls, said in Delhi that the rebels could approach the Election Commission to claim the party’s name and symbol in case of a split.

Srivastava also claimed that all the state party units, except those in Bihar and Jharkhand, were supporting Sharad Yadav and those opposed to Nitish Kumar. “We have received support letters from presidents of 14 state units who are opposed to the JD(U) alliance with BJP. They expressed their willingness to attend the Patna convention but may not be able to do so since it is being held at short notice,” he said.

He accused Nitish Kumar of not honouring the “democratic norms” in removing party leaders without seeking explanation. “I was not served any notice or asked for any explanation. The same happened with Sharad Yadav and Ali Anwar and 21 other leaders who were removed in Bihar,” he claimed.

“We will soon knock on the door of the Election Commission to stake claim over the party symbol ‘arrow’ and inform (people) that the real party is with him (Sharad), not with Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar,” Srivastav said.

“The real JD-U belongs to Sharad Yadav and party units in different states across India are with him,” Srivastav said. “It is Sharad Yadav who formed the JD-U, not Nitish Kumar,” said Srivastav.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

INDIA bloc likely to meet on September 30 over Gyanesh Kumar row

INDIA bloc parties are likely to meet in New Delhi on September 30 amid growing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Published

1 day ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

Rahul-Gandhi

Opposition parties belonging to the INDIA bloc are set to meet in New Delhi on September 30 to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and a proposed removal motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The proposed meeting comes amid growing coordination among opposition parties over the functioning of the poll panel and demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The parties are also discussing a possible joint response to the developments.

Why is the INDIA bloc meeting being planned?

The INDIA bloc meeting on September 30 comes amid reports of objections within the Election Commission over certain decisions and orders related to the SIR exercise. 

According to the report, Opposition leaders have been discussing a coordinated response to their concerns over the Election Commission and the electoral-roll revision process. 

The issue is also expected to be discussed at the Congress Working Committee meeting scheduled for September 29, a day before the proposed INDIA bloc meeting.

Gyanesh Kumar removal demand in focus

The demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has become a major point of contention between the Opposition and the Election Commission.

The CPI(M), CPI and CPI(ML)-Liberation have demanded Kumar’s removal and an immediate halt to the SIR exercise. Congress has also intensified its criticism of the CEC.

Opposition parties are also working on a fresh removal motion against Gyanesh Kumar. The September 30 meeting is expected to finalise the strategy for the motion, including the collection of signatures. According to the report, this would be the Opposition’s third such attempt. 

What is the SIR controversy?

The political dispute is linked to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, or SIR.

The controversy intensified following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on several occasions concerning decisions and orders related to the SIR process.

The Election Commission has said that differing views and observations are part of normal deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures, while stating that the final decisions on the SIR were taken unanimously. 

TMC and Left parties coordinate over the issue

The developments have also brought the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M) together on the Election Commission issue, despite their political differences in West Bengal.

CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby proposed an immediate meeting to discuss a joint strategy. According to the report, Mamata Banerjee spoke with M A Baby and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, after which the leaders settled on September 30 for the meeting. 

What could be discussed at the September 30 meeting?

The proposed meeting is expected to focus on:

  • Concerns surrounding the Election Commission
  • The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls
  • Opposition demands concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • A possible fresh removal notice against the CEC
  • A coordinated response by INDIA bloc parties

The exact agenda and participation will depend on the discussions among the opposition parties before the proposed meeting.

Continue Reading

India News

Gandhi Parivar vs Sangh Parivar, Revanth Reddy’s remark sparks BJP attack

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks contrasting the Gandhi Parivar with the Sangh Parivar triggered a BJP response accusing Congress of prioritising the Gandhi family.

Published

2 days ago

on

September 26, 2026

By

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks comparing the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar have triggered a political exchange, with the BJP hitting back at the Congress leader.

Speaking in Kerala on Friday, Mr Reddy described the contest over India’s future as a fight between the two “parivars”. He said the Gandhi family had made sacrifices for the country while accusing the Sangh Parivar of attempting to divide India on the basis of religion, caste, region and language.

What Revanth Reddy said

Mr Reddy cited Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi while speaking about what he described as sacrifices made by the Gandhi family.

He also referred to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi, saying they had given up positions, power and high office.

The Telangana Chief Minister said he had no remaining personal political ambitions and described his objective as working towards a Congress-led government at the Centre with Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister.

Mr Reddy also appealed to people to stand with the Gandhi Parivar and oppose the Sangh Parivar. He described the latter as a threat to India’s democracy.

BJP hits back

The BJP responded to Mr Reddy’s remarks on Saturday.

BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said the Telangana Chief Minister’s comments amounted to an admission that Congress’s objective was to bring the Gandhi family back to power.

He also linked Mr Reddy’s remarks to the ongoing political debate around “vote chori”, the Election Commission, the Constitution and democracy, arguing that the Congress’s focus was instead on the Gandhi family.

The exchange adds to the political confrontation between the BJP and Congress, with Mr Reddy presenting the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar as opposing forces in India’s political future, while the BJP has interpreted his remarks as evidence of Congress’s focus on the Gandhi family.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

2 days ago

on

September 25, 2026

By

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com