top of page

By:

Rajendra Pandharpure

15 April 2025 at 7:55:54 pm

The BJP’s Ganesha Gambit

Pune’s Ganeshotsav has become an enormous civic and political stage, and the ruling party has proved adept at occupying it. Pune: The city’s Ganeshotsav is entering its final phase, but the festival has already demonstrated something beyond its extraordinary crowds and familiar spectacle: the extent to which it has become a political stage. This year, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has left a particularly visible imprint on the festivities, using an event that reaches deep into the city’s...

The BJP’s Ganesha Gambit

Pune’s Ganeshotsav has become an enormous civic and political stage, and the ruling party has proved adept at occupying it. Pune: The city’s Ganeshotsav is entering its final phase, but the festival has already demonstrated something beyond its extraordinary crowds and familiar spectacle: the extent to which it has become a political stage. This year, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has left a particularly visible imprint on the festivities, using an event that reaches deep into the city’s neighbourhoods as an opportunity for public outreach. The political appropriation of the festival has not, however, been without a counter-current. Demands were raised for curbs on noise pollution, loudspeakers and the volume of dhol-tasha performances. The argument was not against Ganeshotsav itself, but for moderation - notably, a complete ban on DJ music and limits on the number of dhol and tasha instruments used by performing troupes. Familiar Troubles The festival’s reality has been rather different. Major roads have been occupied by mandaps. Processions celebrating the arrival of Lord Ganesha have unfolded amid punishing noise. DJ music, while subject to restrictions, has continued. Traffic congestion has become a familiar feature of the festival, with the movement of political leaders adding another layer to the city’s already strained roads. The Peth areas have remained crowded deep into the night. The Shrimant Dagdusheth Halwai Ganpati temple has drawn enormous crowds for darshan from the opening day. From the old city to housing societies and neighbourhood mandals, Ganeshotsav touches virtually every part of Pune. For a political party seeking a direct connection with citizens, few occasions offer such a ready-made network of people, institutions and local influencers. The BJP enters this festival with an unusually formidable organisational base. It has two MPs, seven MLAs and more than 100 corporators in Pune. Murlidhar Mohol, one of the city’s MPs, is a Union Minister of State. Chandrakant Patil is a Cabinet minister in the Maharashtra government, while Madhuri Misal is a Minister of State. The party’s presence also extends into the festival’s organisational architecture. Its influence is visible across numerous mandals, large and small. BJP MLA Hemant Rasane is General Secretary of the Shrimant Dagdusheth Halwai Sarvajanik Ganpati Trust. Kunal Tilak, a member of Lokmanya Tilak’s family, is a BJP corporator. The political and cultural histories of Pune therefore intersect in ways that are difficult to ignore. The BJP’s senior leadership has also made the most of the occasion. National President Nitin Nabin visited Pune to seek Lord Ganesha’s blessings, while Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis visited the city before and during the festival. Such visits are about more than religious observance. In a festival watched by millions and embedded in the city’s social life, political visibility comes almost automatically. There is also talk in Pune that the BJP provided substantial financial support to Dhol-Lezim troupes and their organisers, with claims that some major mandals received financial backing as well. These claims would require independent verification, but the perception itself points to the depth of the political contest around Ganeshotsav. BJP workers, according to local observers, have also sought to make their presence more conspicuous than that of festivities organised by housing societies. Useful Expedient The festival arrives at a politically useful moment for the BJP. The party has faced disquiet on several fronts. Young people have been agitated over the paper-leak controversy. Broader public dissatisfaction has been voiced over inflation and unemployment, while government policies relating to ethanol and charges associated with UPI transactions have also generated criticism. While a political party can defend a policy in a press conference and advertise its achievements, during Ganeshotsav, its workers can be physically present in neighbourhoods, among processions, mandals, cultural groups and devotees. Politics thus becomes less about argument and more about visibility. That is the BJP’s advantage in Pune. Ganeshotsav, after all, is not simply a sequence of religious rituals. It is an elaborate civic network involving local organisers, volunteers, cultural groups, businesses, residents and political representatives. Whoever has influence over that network acquires a powerful channel of communication with the city. The BJP appears to understand this particularly well. Its strength in Pune’s electoral politics has been reinforced by a presence that extends beyond elections and into the institutions and social spaces that organise public life. The irony is that the very scale of the festival that makes it politically attractive also magnifies the civic costs. The political value of Ganeshotsav and the civic burden it creates are therefore two sides of the same phenomenon. For Pune, the larger question is not whether politics has entered Ganeshotsav. It has done so for decades. The more consequential question is whether the festival’s extraordinary social capital will remain primarily a vehicle for political outreach or whether the same influence can be used to reconcile celebration with the ordinary civic needs of the city. For the moment, the BJP seems to have understood the first proposition better than most.

Dignified Exit

Mar 12
2 min read

For a country where debates on life and death are often filtered through religion, morality and medical caution, the Supreme Court’s recent order permitting passive euthanasia for a 32-year-old man in a permanent vegetative state marks a moment of quiet but profound significance. In allowing the withdrawal of life support for Harish Rana, who has remained in a coma for more than 13 years, the apex court has nudged the country closer to recognising what modern medicine has long complicated: the boundary between prolonging life and prolonging suffering.

 

Rana’s case is tragic in its simplicity. A football-loving engineering student at Panjab University, he suffered severe head injuries after falling from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation in Ghaziabad in 2013. Since then, he has lived in a state that medicine describes as “permanent vegetative” - a condition where the body survives but consciousness is absent. For more than a decade, his family cared for him at home, sustained by hope but bound by the harsh reality that recovery was medically improbable. Their plea to withdraw life support eventually reached the Supreme Court.


The court directed that the procedure be carried out under careful medical supervision and in a manner that preserves the patient’s dignity. More significantly, the judges urged the government to enact comprehensive legislation on passive euthanasia, acknowledging that the legal framework remains incomplete.

 

The ruling builds upon a gradual legal evolution. India first confronted the question of mercy killing in the 2011 Aruna Shanbaug case. Shanbaug, a Mumbai nurse who had been brutally assaulted and left paralysed with severe brain damage, remained in a vegetative state for over four decades. The Supreme Court refused to allow passive euthanasia in her case because the petition had been filed by a journalist rather than a close relative. Yet the judgment cautiously opened the door by permitting passive euthanasia in exceptional circumstances under judicial oversight.

 

A clearer framework arrived in 2018 in the ‘Common Cause v. Union of India’ judgment. A five-judge constitutional bench declared that the right to die with dignity is intrinsic to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. It also laid down guidelines for passive euthanasia, requiring decisions to be vetted by two independent medical boards after consultation with the patient’s family.


Rana’s case is the first time the Supreme Court has directly authorised the withdrawal of life support under this evolving doctrine. The ruling therefore transforms abstract constitutional principles into practical precedent.


Many fear that legalising euthanasia might expose vulnerable patients to coercion or economic pressure from families struggling with medical costs. The judiciary has therefore emphasised procedural safeguards like multiple medical boards, judicial scrutiny and the centrality of family consent.


India has long celebrated the sanctity of life. The law is now beginning to acknowledge another truth: that dignity, too, has its own claims at the end of life.

Comments


bottom of page