BJP wanted to make me a minister to support Nitish: Sharad Yadav

Sharad Yadav during a press conference at his residence
Sharad Yadav during a press conference at his residence in 2017 in New Delhi. Photo by Arvind Yadav/Hindustan Times via Getty Images

The crack has only widened between Sharad Yadav and JD(U) chief Nitish Kumar over the past few months, resulting in the party ousting him from its leadership fold

New Delhi: Rebel Janata Dal (United) leader Sharad Yadav, who parted ways with Nitish Kumar after he broke the Bihar grand alliance to join hands with the BJP, disclosed for the first time to ThePrint that the BJP had tried to lure him with a ministerial berth to keep him in the tent.

“BJP aur hamari party ne kitna prayas kiya ki hum mantri ban jaaye. Jab hum mantri chhod diye.. hum jaante they kitne hurdles ayenge. (The BJP and even my party tried hard that I become a minister. But when I decided against becoming a minister, I knew more hurdles will come my way,” Yadav told ThePrint Thursday .

He said people in his party have lost their way, forgotten the “path of principles” and changed their approach.

“My party forgot that we had made a promise to 11 crore people (of Bihar) and now we have walked into the lap of the opposition there. Don’t forget we used to talk about an RSS-mukt Bharat. What happened was great injustice on our part with the entire nation,” he said.

The crack has only widened between Yadav and Nitish Kumar over the past few months, resulting in the party ousting him from its leadership fold. Based on this, Vice-President M. Venkaiah Naidu, who is the Rajya Sabha Chairman, recently disqualified him from parliamentary membership.

Yet, Yadav still calls JD (U) ‘his party’, asserting that he has not conceded defeat and will challenge Nitish’s claim over the party.

“This is problem within my party and I will look to correct it,” he said.

Yadav and his colleague Ali Anwar, who were both disqualified from the Rajya Sabha, alleged that due procedures were not followed in making this decision. They claimed that the cases should have first gone to the Ethics or Privilege committee.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here