Ongoing rift in Samajwadi Party surfaces publicly
The internal tussle within the Samajwadi Party (SP) took a sharper turn on Monday as SP chief Akhilesh Yadav reacted strongly to remarks made by expelled party MLA Pooja Pal, who recently accused the party leadership of “shielding criminals.” Responding to the allegations, Yadav questioned the origin of her remarks, suggesting that “someone may be behind the words written by Pooja Pal.”
His statement has added a new dimension to the war of words that has been playing out in the open, highlighting the growing discord within the party ahead of crucial political battles in Uttar Pradesh.
The trigger: Pooja Pal’s accusations
Pooja Pal, who represents the Chail constituency in Kaushambi district, was expelled from the Samajwadi Party last week. In her sharp criticism of the party leadership, she claimed that the SP was “protecting criminals” and ignoring the voices of honest leaders and workers.
Pal’s remarks stirred political circles in Uttar Pradesh, with the ruling BJP seizing the opportunity to target the SP. Her comments also put the party on the defensive, as the allegations touched upon issues that the opposition has consistently raised against the SP in past elections.
Akhilesh’s counterattack
Addressing reporters in Lucknow on Monday, Akhilesh Yadav brushed aside Pal’s charges, asserting that her statements were not original. “Who is helping her write such words? Someone may be behind what she is saying. It does not sound like her own,” Yadav remarked.
The SP chief hinted that Pal’s sudden outburst and the nature of her accusations suggested external influence, though he refrained from naming any political party or individual. His statement is being seen as an indirect reference to the BJP, which has often been accused by opposition leaders of using disgruntled politicians to weaken rival parties.
Political backdrop of Pooja Pal
Pooja Pal entered politics after the murder of her husband, Raju Pal, a Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) MLA who was shot dead in Allahabad (now Prayagraj) in 2005. She later contested elections on a BSP ticket and eventually joined the Samajwadi Party, winning the Chail Assembly seat.
Her political journey has often been framed within the context of her fight for justice for her late husband. Observers note that her recent fallout with the SP leadership could affect political equations in her constituency, where she retains a strong personal base.
SP’s strategy and damage control
The controversy comes at a time when the SP is attempting to consolidate its support base ahead of the 2027 Assembly elections and position itself as the principal challenger to the BJP. Party insiders admitted that Pal’s remarks created “unwanted noise” but maintained that the leadership was not overly concerned.
“Akhilesh ji’s response indicates that the party believes Pooja Pal’s comments are politically motivated and influenced from outside. SP will continue to focus on larger issues concerning farmers, youth, and inflation rather than getting distracted,” a party functionary said.
Opposition reaction
Leaders of the ruling BJP wasted no time in amplifying Pal’s charges. “Even SP’s own leaders are now admitting that the party shelters criminals. This has been the reality of Samajwadi Party’s politics,” a BJP spokesperson said.
The Congress and BSP, while refraining from directly commenting on the SP-Pal spat, pointed out that the episode reflected the challenges regional parties face in managing internal dissent.
What lies ahead
With Akhilesh Yadav choosing to publicly counter Pooja Pal, the episode has escalated beyond an internal matter. Political analysts suggest that the issue may have limited electoral impact in the short run but could be used by rivals to dent the SP’s image.
As Uttar Pradesh heads into a politically charged atmosphere, the rift between Akhilesh Yadav and Pooja Pal underlines the challenges of party discipline, leadership control, and the ever-present influence of rival parties in shaping narratives.
For now, Akhilesh has signaled that the party sees Pal’s remarks as externally driven, while Pooja Pal stands firm on her claim that the SP has deviated from its principles. The war of words, it seems, is far from over.
