The National Democratic Alliance (NDA) on Saturday, 10 October sharply questioned the veracity of remarks made by Lok Sabha Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi after the INDIA Bloc delegation met President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhavan in New Delhi to submit a memorandum over alleged electoral irregularities. NDA leaders argued that while Gandhi had every right to seek an audience with the President, publicly disclosing the contents of that conversation was improper and potentially inaccurate.

Background: What the INDIA Bloc Alleged

A high-level INDIA Bloc delegation — led by Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi and including All India Trinamool Congress Chairperson Mamata Banerjee, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, NCP-SP MP Supriya Sule, CPI-M General Secretary M.A. Baby, RJD Rajya Sabha member Prof Manoj Kumar Jha, CPI General Secretary D. Raja, Samajwadi Party MP Rajeev Rai, and VCK President Dr Thirumaavalavan Tholkappiyan — met the President on Friday and submitted a memorandum alleging electoral irregularities by Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and what the bloc described as an attempt to undermine Indian democracy.

Gandhi subsequently said that President Murmu had asked the Opposition delegation to furnish evidence to substantiate its claims of 'vote chori' (vote theft) during their discussion about the controversy surrounding the CEC. The Opposition has been demanding Kumar's resignation and has protested against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

BJP's Response: Propriety and Presidential Dignity

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Rajiv Pratap Rudy challenged the propriety of Gandhi's public disclosure, raising questions about the dignity of the constitutional office of the President. 'When you meet a person holding the country's highest constitutional office and then disclose what was discussed, it raises serious questions about propriety. Neither you nor I can go and ask the President what she said. Rahul Gandhi's claims may even be untrue. However, as the Leader of the Opposition, he has the right to meet the President, but he does not have the right to comment on what the President said,' Rudy said.

Bihar BJP President Sanjay Saraogi echoed the criticism while also challenging the substance of the Opposition's allegations. He noted that while meeting the President was a constitutional right, no evidence was reportedly submitted on the SIR. 'The SIR process takes around 150 days, during which draft publications are shared with district presidents and a one-month period is given for objections. Across the country, around 20 lakh names have been deleted, and even ordinary citizens can fill Form 7,' Saraogi said.

JD(U) Strikes a Broader Note

Janata Dal (United) National Spokesperson Rajiv Ranjan acknowledged that political parties in a democracy were free to voice their concerns, but turned the argument back on the Opposition, questioning its political standing with voters. 'In a democracy, no political party is barred from expressing its views. However, Opposition parties must understand that they reap what they sow. You have consistently ignored the people. Gyanesh Kumar's tenure may be short-lived, but there are several states where the Congress was once a mainstream party and has been unable to regain that status,' Ranjan said.

Context: Protests Over Electoral Roll Revision

The Rashtrapati Bhavan visit followed several days of protests by Opposition leaders against the Election Commission, targeting both the SIR exercise and what they described as structural irregularities in the electoral process. The INDIA Bloc's memorandum and the subsequent public statements have sharply escalated the political confrontation ahead of state elections, setting up a direct clash between the Opposition's narrative of democratic subversion and the ruling alliance's charge that the allegations lack evidentiary backing.

With the Election Commission yet to formally respond and the government defending the SIR process, the dispute over who said what in Rashtrapati Bhavan is unlikely to be the last word in what is shaping up as one of the more acrimonious electoral disputes of the year.