Parliament LIVE: Anurag Thakur Attacks Rahul Gandhi, Says Sikhs Genocide Happened In Congress Regime

In a heated exchange in the Lok Sabha, BJP MP Anurag Thakur responded to Rahul Gandhi's remarks on the Constitution. Thakur criticised Gandhi for frequently displaying the Constitution without understanding its contents. He accused the Congress party of undermining democracy during their rule, highlighting the imposition of Emergency and violence against Sikhs.

Thakur directly addressed Rahul Gandhi, urging him to read the Constitution rather than merely carrying it around. He claimed that if Gandhi did so, he would realise how the Congress party and his family have allegedly damaged it. Thakur also reminded everyone of the riots that occurred under Congress's governance.

Constitutional Debate Intensifies

Rahul Gandhi had earlier targeted BJP by questioning their commitment to the Constitution. He pointed out that key elements of India's Constitution are inspired by figures like Gandhi and Kabir. However, he noted that Savarkar, a prominent leader associated with BJP, had dismissed these influences as un-Indian.

Gandhi further criticised BJP using the story of Eklavya, comparing Dronacharya's demand for Eklavya's thumb to BJP's alleged actions against youth and the poor. He suggested that BJP is metaphorically cutting off opportunities for these groups.

Historical Allegations Resurface

Anurag Thakur countered these allegations by accusing Congress of historical wrongdoings. He mentioned that most riots including the 1984 Sikhs genocide happened during Congress rule and demanded an apology from them for allegedly tearing apart the country's Constitution.

The debate on constitutional values continues to be a contentious issue between BJP and Congress. Both parties accuse each other of failing to uphold democratic principles while claiming to protect them.

The ongoing discussions in Parliament highlight deep-seated political rivalries and differing interpretations of India's constitutional heritage. As both sides present their narratives, the public remains engaged in this critical discourse on governance and democracy.