The tongue that showed non-cooperation to the Cooperation Minister
VB Editorial | August 14, 2025 |
There is a saying: “An old root and a new sprout make a beautiful tree.” In politics, senior leaders are expected to be those roots, deep, steady, and guiding the party through storms. Their long experience should strengthen the organisation, not weaken it. But in the Congress today, that very idea seems to have turned upside down. Instead of standing as pillars of strength, many seniors have turned into burdens, creating more embarrassment than support.
Take the case of S. M. Krishna. Once a towering figure who served as Chief Minister, Union Minister, and Governor, he left the Congress in his final years claiming neglect, only to end his career making bitter statements against the very party that gave him everything. Even after joining the BJP, he found no real honour. The same story played out with leaders like Pranab Mukherjee and Ghulam Nabi Azad, who used the Congress like a banana leaf, useful only until it was discarded. Now, Shashi Tharoor too seems to be leaning towards that path.
In contrast, Rahul Gandhi, despite facing ridicule and setbacks, has remained committed to the party’s ideology. With the Bharat Jodo Yatra and relentless campaigns, he has tried to inject new life into the organisation. While some seniors pull the party backwards, Rahul struggles to push it forward.
It is largely due to Rahul’s persistence that “vote theft” has become a subject of national debate. From Madhya Pradesh to Maharashtra, from Karnataka to Bihar, he has highlighted the manipulation of electoral rolls and the complicity of the Election Commission. In Bihar especially, the scale of irregularities has alarmed the nation, with even the Supreme Court expressing concern. At such a crucial time, when democracy itself seems at risk, Congress leaders across states should be rallying behind him. Instead, Karnataka’s Cooperation Minister, Rajanna, chose to display his non-cooperation.
His loose remarks, questioning Rahul’s allegations, handed the BJP an unexpected weapon. The irony is sharp: at a moment when the opposition should have spoken in one voice, a minister from within broke ranks and weakened his own party. Rajanna’s statement has not only embarrassed Congress but also placed his own ministerial post on the chopping block.
Even if his intention was not to target the high command, Rajanna cannot claim ignorance of how his words would be twisted. When the very institution of the Election Commission is accused of undermining democracy, it was his duty as a minister to lend his voice to the struggle, not fuel the fire of dissent. Instead, he dug a pit for himself — and now finds BJP leaders stretching a false hand of sympathy to pull him out.
The opposition has predictably seized on his statement. Both Houses have witnessed heated arguments over whether Rajanna should be sacked, with BJP leaders crying hoarse that he has been made a scapegoat. Their hypocrisy is glaring. This is the same BJP that mercilessly silences its own leaders, MLAs, journalists, activists, and even police officers when they dare to speak the truth. Their newfound compassion for Rajanna is nothing more than political theatre.
At the same time, the episode raises questions about Congress’s internal democracy. Some argue that Rajanna’s freedom of speech should be respected. But freedom of speech inside a party cannot extend to giving ammunition to political opponents when the battle is over saving democracy itself. This is not the first time Rajanna has made remarks that hint at sympathy for the BJP. In the past, the party tolerated him. This time, however, his words struck directly at the high command, and at Rahul Gandhi’s fight against electoral fraud.
Rajanna’s rhetorical question, “What was the state government doing when irregularities were happening?”, might have been aimed at Karnataka Congress leaders. But its impact went far beyond, undermining the larger national struggle. Anyone with political maturity would know that the Centre can engineer manipulation through the Election Commission regardless of which party runs a state government. Bihar is proof enough.
Internal debates within a party are natural. But there is a time and place for everything. Rajanna chose the wrong time, wrong place, and wrong words. Whether his motive was carelessness or deliberate sabotage, the outcome is the same: he has damaged both himself and his party.
It is indeed unfortunate that another minister from the Valmiki community has had to step down. But in this case, Rajanna has no one else to blame. His fall came not from his opponents, not from the BJP, not even from the Congress high command, but from his own tongue.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Husband has to equally participate in household chores as he is not marrying a maid: SC
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday said a husband has to equally participate in household chores like cooking, cleaning and washing as he is not marrying a maid but a life partner.
The observations came from a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta which was hearing a petition filed by a man challenging an order of the Karnataka High Court.
The high court had set aside a trial court order granting divorce to the man on the ground of cruelty.
During the hearing before the apex court, the counsel appearing for the man said the mediation between the parties had failed.
He said the marriage between the parties took place in May 2017 and since 2019, the couple is separated.
ALSO READ: Four held for throwing non-veg food leftovers near temple
"I (man) want a divorce. The trial court granted a divorce on the ground of cruelty," the counsel said.
The bench asked what the cruelty was as alleged in the matter.
The counsel appearing for the man said the woman had indulged in improper behaviour and was not cooking food.
"You have to equally participate in all these. Cooking, cleaning, washing, everything. Today's times are different," Justice Nath observed, adding the high court was right that it might not be a ground for cruelty.
"You are not marrying a maid. You are marrying a life partner," Justice Mehta observed.
The bench was told that both of them were working in a government school.
"Call both parties physically. We would like to speak to them," the bench said.
It posted the matter for hearing on April 27 and asked both parties to remain present before it.
