Disgruntled BJP MP Shatrughan Sinha on Saturday criticised the Centre’s decision to impose President’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh, taking potshots at Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “great advisors” and wondering what answers they will have if the Supreme Court ruled against it.
Sinha, who has been at variance with the party leadership over a host of issues, questioned the government’s “hurry and worry” when the matter was being heard by the apex court.
The BJP-led government has come under attack from the Congress for allegedly trying to topple democratically elected governments of opposition parties.
“I have tremendous faith in our dashing, dynamic action hero PM. But wonder who the ‘great’ advisors are who advised President’s Rule in AP. That too when the matter is sub judice, in the Supreme Court, under a 5 judge constitutional bench. Wonder what was the hurry and worry,” he said in a series of tweets, a day after the Centre justified its decision in the apex court.
“God forbid, if the decision does not go in our favour, wonder what explanation and answer we will have for our respected PM,” said Sinha, a Bollywood actor turned politician known as ‘Shotgun’.
On Friday, the Centre had submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court justifying imposition of President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh, saying there was “complete breakdown” of governance and law and order in the state where the Governor and his family apprehended “grave danger to their lives” every day.
President Pranab Mukherjee had earlier this week given assent to the Union Cabinet’s decision to impose central rule in the northeastern state.
Arunachal Pradesh governor JP Rajkhowa had told the apex court that chief minister Nabam Tuki and his ministers had made it impossible for him to discharge his duties.
Rajkhowa has also accused Tuki of communal politics by provoking local tribesmen and funding public protests to seek his ouster. He also alleged that he was abused, threatened and nearly assaulted by some ministers.
Tuki has filed a fresh petition in the Supreme Court challenging the promulgation.