top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Congress ditched us first: Sunil Tatkare

Mumbai: In a significant escalation of the ongoing friction within Maharashtra’s political landscape, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) state unit chief Sunil Tatkare has squarely blamed the Congress party for the disintegration of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance. In a candid interview with a Marathi television news channel, Tatkare asserted that the Congress was the first to "ditch" its partners, a move he claims fundamentally broke the trust required to sustain the coalition and...

Congress ditched us first: Sunil Tatkare

Mumbai: In a significant escalation of the ongoing friction within Maharashtra’s political landscape, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) state unit chief Sunil Tatkare has squarely blamed the Congress party for the disintegration of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance. In a candid interview with a Marathi television news channel, Tatkare asserted that the Congress was the first to "ditch" its partners, a move he claims fundamentally broke the trust required to sustain the coalition and forced the NCP to reconsider its political future. Tatkare’s revelations come at a fragile moment for the NCP, which is still reeling from the sudden accidental death of Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar in late January 2026. The tragedy has sparked intense speculation about a potential "Ghar Wapsi" or reunion between the rival NCP factions. However, Tatkare has emerged as a lightning rod for criticism from the Sharad Pawar-led NCP (NCP-SP), with leaders like Shashikant Shinde and Rohit Pawar accusing him of being a "blockade" acting at the behest of the BJP to prevent the party from coming back together. Addressing these allegations, Tatkare defended the party’s decision to remain aligned with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) under the Mahayuti banner. “The BJP and the top leadership of NDA have given us a trust and the clarity that they would take us along ahead. We have even worked as part of the UPA earlier. I was the state president of the party even back then. We have closely experienced – and even suffered - the ill treatment mated to the allies there. We have also observed the BJP’s conduct since 2014,” Tatkare said while explain what went behind his party’s decision to go along with the BJP. While elaborating on the specific incidents that led to the beginning of the end, Tatkare gave a specific anecdote from the seat sharing talks with the Congress. “I was the state party chief and we were in seat sharing talks with Prithviraj Chavan representing the Congress. We wanted some seats exchanged. We were asked to furnish the list. Despite my suspicion and hence opposition, we shared the list. My nightmares came true. The Congress declared their candidates on all the seats. That was the first fissure within the MVA,” Tatkare said. He noted that unlike their experience with the Congress, the BJP has consistently followed "alliance conduct" and treated its partners with cordiality. He dismissed the reunification rumours as baseless, emphasising that the party is committed to carrying forward the ideology and political stand established by the late Ajit Pawar.

Sacred Attire

Updated: Jan 30, 2025

The Siddhivinayak Temple Trust’s recent decision to implement a dress code prohibiting short skirts, torn jeans and other revealing attire is a necessary move to uphold the sanctity of religious spaces. Temples are spiritual spaces where devotees seek solace, offer prayers, and connect with the divine. Temples are not mere tourist attractions but sacred sanctuaries. The least that visitors can do is dress accordingly.


The Jagannath temple in Puri, Odisha, and the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan have already implemented similar rules, reflecting a growing recognition that religious spaces require a modicum of decorum. In the case of Siddhivinayak, the temple attracts thousands of devotees daily, many of whom have expressed discomfort over attire that they feel clashes with the temple’s spiritual ambience.


Few would question the need for decorum in a courtroom, a government office, or even an upscale restaurant. Yet, when religious institutions enforce dress codes to preserve their sanctity, a chorus of indignation often rises in the name of personal freedom, with such ‘critics’ arguing that such rules reflect moral policing or an imposition of traditionalist values.

But this argument confuses religious sanctity with public space liberalism. No one is being compelled to enter the temple, and those who do should respect the customs that govern it. Even in non-Hindu religious spaces, dress codes are the norm. One does not enter a gurdwara without covering their head, nor a mosque or church dressed in attire deemed unsuitable for prayer. The sanctity of a religious institution should not be sacrificed at the altar of modern whims.


To dismiss this as an encroachment on personal liberties is to misunderstand the nature of such spaces. Religious sites operate under different expectations than public thoroughfares or commercial hubs. They are designed for reflection, devotion, and ritual. While Indian society has rightly evolved towards greater personal freedom in many spheres, faith-based institutions must be allowed to maintain traditions that are integral to their identity. The temple trust has made it clear that its goal is not to impose regressive restrictions but to ensure that all visitors feel comfortable and that the sanctity of the temple is upheld.


Moreover, the argument that religious sites must remain entirely open-ended in their dress codes simply does not hold water. Many of the people who object to these restrictions would scarcely question the need for appropriate attire at a formal event or while meeting a dignitary. The principle is the same -respect for the setting dictates the mode of dress. Those who seek to frame this as a battle between liberalism and conservatism fail to grasp that such measures are about propriety, not repression.


In an era where the lines between cultural expression and decorum are increasingly blurred, it is worth remembering that not every rule is an infringement on liberty. If people can abide by dress codes in secular spaces, they should extend the same courtesy to places of worship.

Comments


bottom of page