By TC News Desk
Agartala, 4th September 2024: The Tripura Legislative Assembly’s monsoon session on Wednesday was marked by significant uproar following Minister Sudhangshu Das’ controversial social media statement about Hindus. The opposition parties seized the opportunity to challenge the Treasury bench, including the ministers. Transport Minister Sushanta Chowdhury clarified that Minister Das’ statement did not reflect the views of the BJP or the state government. He emphasized that the constitution grants everyone the right to express personal opinions, subtly defending Das’s freedom of speech. Agriculture Minister Ratan Lal Nath supported Das, explaining the context of his social media post. Nath accused the CPIM of attempting to incite riots in the state by misinterpreting Das’s words. In his defense, Sudhangshu Das accused Congress and CPIM of being anti-Hindu. The opposition, in protest, descended into the well of the house and demonstrated for a while.
During a break in the Assembly session on Wednesday, Congress MLA Birajit Sinha brought up Minister Sudhangshu Das’ controversial social media comments about Hindus. Sinha expressed that such statements are deeply unfortunate and have upset the people of the state. He called for Minister Das to apologize for addressing such a sensitive issue. In response, members of the Treasury Bench rallied in support of Das, lighting torches and raising their voices. BJP MLA Abhishek Debroy highlighted the need for caution given the current situation in Bangladesh. He stressed that it is undesirable for Jihadi forces to increase their activities in the state and claimed that the situation in Bangladesh has already impacted Tripura. Debroy explained that Minister Das’ social media post was intended as a warning to the public.
Congress MLA Sudip Roy Barman strongly criticized BJP MLA Abhishek Debroy’s controversial remarks. Barman emphasized that India is governed by the Constitution, and those sworn to uphold it should not make provocative statements. He pointed out, with sarcasm, that the contentious statement was later removed from social media. Barman stressed that ministers should avoid actions that could disrupt the state’s peace and order. Directing his sarcasm at Minister Sudhangshu Das, Barman remarked that it is undesirable for such statements to hurt Hindus in neighboring Bangladesh, and called for Das to apologize.
In response, Transport Minister Sushanta Chowdhury stood up to defend Sudhangshu Das. He acknowledged that while the controversial statement was seen on social media and subsequently deleted, it did not reflect the views of the BJP or the state government. Chowdhury emphasized that the constitution grants everyone the right to express personal opinions.
Similarly, MLA Binoy Bhushan Das voiced his support for Minister Das. However, the leader of the opposition questioned why no action was being taken against the minister for hate speech, pointing out that an ordinary citizen would likely face consequences for such remarks. He mentioned that upon seeing the controversial statement, he immediately informed the Chief Minister, the District Superintendent of Police, and the Director General of State Police, but to no avail. Jitendra also insisted that Minister Das should apologize.The Treasury Bench was getting restless under pressure from the opposition one after another. That’s when Agriculture Minister Ratan Lal Nath stepped in as the savior. Citing the statement of the CPIM state secretariat against the controversial statement of Minister Das on social media, Nath claimed that the CPIM wanted riots in the state. Because the statement targeted the minority community, not a single word was spent on it.
Ratan Lal Nath clarified that the term “Jihadi” used by Sudhangshu Das was not directed at any specific community and that its meaning could be misconstrued without proper context. He accused the CPIM of trying to create public tension by misinterpreting the term. Congress MLA Sudip Roy Barman questioned the intent behind Minister Das’ controversial statement about body temperature, asking if it was an attempt to undermine religious neutrality. He advised Minister Das to refrain from making such statements while holding a ministerial position and upholding the constitution.
Meanwhile, BJP MLAs Kishor Barman and Tafajjal Hussain defended Minister Das. Kishor Barman suggested that the speech aimed to awaken the community, while criticizing the Communists for being anti-Hindu. Tafajjal Hussain noted that Muslims did not protest against Minister Das’ statement.
Finally, Minister Sudhangshu Das rose to defend himself, quoting verses from the Gita and referencing Mahatma Gandhi. He recounted historical events such as the 1946 Hindu massacre in Noakhali, the displacement of millions of Hindus during the 1971 war, and the liberation of Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir. He argued that similar trends are being observed today. Minister Das accused Congress and CPIM of being anti-Hindu and supporting terrorists, which provoked a strong reaction from the opposition. The opponents turned red with anger and began shouting. Amidst the commotion, Speaker Biswa Bandhu Sen allowed Minister Das to continue speaking, leading to further protests from the opposition in the well of the house. The assembly session briefly heated up due to the opposition’s demonstrations.
