Mumbai: There is a speculation that the BJP is making systematic efforts for the Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar’s defeat in the Assembly election. The statement made by BJP legislator Sadabhau Khot against NCP(SP) supremo Sharad Pawar is looked upon as the first step towards turning the noose around Ajit Pawar.
On Wednesday, while addressing a gathering in Sangli district, Khot passed remarks comparing Sharad Pawar’s face with Maharashtra’s roads. “Whether Pawar intended to make Maharashtra like his face,” Khot had said.
His comments drew sharp reactions from both the wings of NCP.
According to sources, these remarks were part of a well calculated move of the BJP. The party’s think tank is fully aware of the fact that people in Baramati along with Pune district and Western Maharashtra don’t like any adverse statement against Sharad Pawar. So the saffron party made this first move with the help of Khot to corner Ajit Pawar.
Minister Chandrakant Patil, just before the Parliament election visited Baramati and said, “BJP wants to defeat Sharad Pawar at any cost.” After the result of the Lok Sabha election Ajit Pawar openly blamed the BJP minister for negative impact in voting. “Patil should not have made the statement against my uncle,” the deputy CM has said. Pawar’s wife lost in Baramati to Supriya Sule by more than 1.5 lakh votes. The statement possibly resulted in a sympathy wave for the veteran leader.
People in Baramati have strong feelings about Sharad Pawar. They vociferously oppose any tirade against him. So the BJP has made a plan to hammer the Pawar senior on regular interval till the date of election, sources added.
With the candidature of Nawab Malik, the rift between BJP and NCP has widened. The BJP has officially declared that it would not campaign for the NCP candidate Nawab Malik. Ajit Pawar also ignored BJP’s displeasure. Due to which the tension between two parties have reached the peak. Upset BJP leadership has now decided to target Sharad Pawar to hamper the prospects of Ajit Pawar in Baramati constituency.
Comments