UP Politics Heats Up: Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak Slams Samajwadi Party Over Mosque Meeting Near Parliament
UP Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak accuses Samajwadi Party of constitutional violations after mosque meeting near Parliament. Political tensions rise ahead of 2026 polls.
NewsSutra
In a fresh escalation of Uttar Pradesh’s charged political landscape, Deputy Chief Minister Brajesh Pathak has launched a fierce attack on the Samajwadi Party (SP), accusing its leadership of violating constitutional values and engaging in "blatant communal appeasement". His remarks come in the wake of a widely circulated video showing SP MPs holding a political meeting at a mosque near the Indian Parliament—a move that has stirred sharp criticism and reignited debates over the separation of religion and politics.
Pathak, a senior BJP leader known for his aggressive positioning, termed the act a “direct insult to the Constitution of India,” and alleged that the Samajwadi Party was “disrespecting the secular fabric of the country for electoral gains.”
“This isn’t just about symbolism. It’s about the intent behind using religious platforms for political maneuvering,” Pathak said during a press briefing in Lucknow. “Such practices are dangerous and polarizing, especially in a democracy like ours.”
His comments have been echoed by various BJP leaders and legal experts who believe that the incident could set a troubling precedent if left unchecked.
The Controversial Mosque Meeting: What Happened?
The controversy began after video footage surfaced showing several Samajwadi Party Members of Parliament, led by a prominent SP leader, gathered at a mosque adjacent to the Parliament premises in New Delhi. According to eyewitness accounts and media reports, the meeting involved strategic discussions related to the party’s Lok Sabha performance, as well as community mobilization efforts in the lead-up to the 2026 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections.
While the SP has defended the gathering as a “casual post-prayer discussion,” critics within the ruling BJP allege that it was a calculated attempt to signal religious alignment and “build an exclusive vote bank.”
Legal experts have noted that while there is no explicit constitutional provision banning political gatherings in religious spaces, the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) issued by the Election Commission prohibits any religious appeals during campaigns, especially when elections are underway or imminent.
Brajesh Pathak’s Charges Against SP
Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak was quick to seize the moment. In a strongly worded statement, he questioned the "secular credentials" of the Samajwadi Party and accused it of "misusing places of worship for electoral politics."
“Does the Samajwadi Party believe in democracy or does it intend to drag religion into everything?” he asked. “Using mosques or temples for political meetings is an insult to both faith and governance.”
Pathak also emphasized the importance of political accountability, urging the Election Commission to take suo moto cognizance of the incident and investigate potential violations of election ethics.
He further claimed that the act was part of a pattern, referencing previous instances where SP leaders have been accused of communal appeasement and minority-centric campaigning.
SP’s Response: Denial and Counterattack
In response to Pathak’s remarks, the Samajwadi Party leadership dismissed the allegations as politically motivated and said the meeting was being misrepresented.
A senior SP spokesperson said, “This is a classic case of the BJP manufacturing outrage. Our MPs had just finished afternoon prayers and were informally discussing party matters. There was no official meeting, nor any communal agenda.”
SP leaders have also accused the BJP of diverting attention from the real issues facing Uttar Pradesh, such as rising unemployment, law and order concerns, and agrarian distress.
Rising Political Temperatures Ahead of 2026 UP Elections
The war of words between BJP and SP signals the beginning of intense political maneuvering ahead of the 2026 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections. With less than a year to go, parties are activating their core voter bases, refining narratives, and preparing for ideological showdowns.
While the BJP continues to ride high on its development plank and Hindu nationalist appeal, the SP is focusing on social justice rhetoric, caste alignment, and minority consolidation.
The mosque meeting controversy, therefore, becomes more than just an isolated event—it feeds into broader narratives of polarization, identity politics, and constitutional ethics that will likely dominate the pre-election discourse.
For a comprehensive review of recent political shifts in Uttar Pradesh, readers may refer to this detailed report on UP’s political battleground from India Today.
Legal and Constitutional Implications
According to legal analysts, while the act of holding political conversations at a mosque is not in itself illegal, it walks a fine line.
Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, but the Representation of the People Act (1951) explicitly forbids the use of religious symbols or venues to influence voting behavior. If it can be established that the mosque meeting was aimed at communal mobilization, it could potentially violate electoral law.
Former Chief Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi has previously remarked that India’s democracy must remain “firmly grounded in secularism” and that religious venues must be kept separate from campaign politics to ensure fair elections.
Public Sentiment: A Divided Reaction
Public reaction to the controversy has been predictably divided. While BJP supporters have lauded Pathak’s stance as “protecting secularism from opportunism,” Samajwadi Party loyalists argue that the BJP itself has often blurred the lines between religion and politics, citing temple inaugurations and public religious ceremonies attended by top party leaders during election seasons.
Political analysts suggest that the polarized nature of Indian politics has made it difficult for any incident to be viewed objectively. Every act, regardless of intent, becomes a tool for narrative control.
In towns like Kanpur and Varanasi, common citizens appear more concerned with issues like inflation, water shortages, and urban congestion than political meetings in religious venues. However, such controversies often serve to energize the party base, especially among urban and rural middle-class voters.
Brajesh Pathak: Emerging as BJP’s Hardliner Voice
Over the past few years, Brajesh Pathak has emerged as one of the most vocal and hard-hitting leaders within the Uttar Pradesh BJP. Known for his legal background and fiery oratory, Pathak has steadily climbed the ranks and is widely viewed as a potential successor to Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.
His aggressive criticism of the Samajwadi Party fits into his broader political brand—one that combines law-and-order rhetoric, religious conservatism, and constitutional vigilance.
Political observers believe that Pathak’s strategy is to draw sharp contrasts between the BJP’s approach to governance and what he describes as the "vote-bank tactics" of opposition parties.
For more background on Brajesh Pathak’s political journey, readers may find this Times of India profile on Pathak’s rise in UP politics informative.
Conclusion
The current controversy involving a mosque meeting near Parliament may seem like a minor skirmish, but it reveals much about the deepening fault lines in Indian politics—where symbolism, identity, and legality intersect.
As Deputy CM Brajesh Pathak continues to press for accountability and constitutional clarity, and the Samajwadi Party digs in with denials and counter-narratives, the road to the 2026 UP elections promises to be both turbulent and ideologically charged.
One thing is certain: religion, politics, and legality will remain deeply intertwined in the battle for India’s largest and most politically crucial state.
