Table of Contents
Introduction
In a decisive statement, Sharad Pawar rejects NCP merger with Ajit Pawar’s BJP-aligned faction in 2025, putting an end to speculations about a potential reunion. Addressing a press conference in Nagpur on August 9, 2025, the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP-SP) president reaffirmed his commitment to his party’s core ideology and dismissed any alignment with the BJP-led alliance. Amid discussions on electoral integrity and the Maha Vikas Aghadi’s performance, Pawar’s stance highlights his focus on ideological consistency and upcoming political challenges. Dive into the details of his remarks, the context of Maharashtra politics, and the broader implications for the state’s electoral landscape.
Sharad Pawar’s Firm Stand on Ideology
Sharad Pawar, a veteran leader and founder of the NCP, made it clear that his faction, NCP (Sharadchandra Pawar), will not align with the BJP or its allies, including the Ajit Pawar-led NCP faction. “We will never align with a BJP-led alliance,” Pawar asserted, emphasizing his commitment to the ideologies of Gandhi, Shahu, Phule, and Ambedkar. This statement comes in response to rumors of a possible merger, fueled by recent public appearances of Sharad and Ajit Pawar together. The NCP split in July 2023 when Ajit Pawar joined the BJP-Shiv Sena coalition, becoming Maharashtra’s deputy chief minister, a move that Pawar labeled as opportunistic.
Context of the Press Conference
During the Nagpur press conference, Pawar addressed multiple issues, including electoral concerns raised by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. He praised Gandhi’s presentation on “vote theft” as well-researched, urging the Election Commission of India (ECI) to investigate claims of discrepancies in voter lists. Pawar admitted that the opposition Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA), comprising NCP-SP, Congress, and Shiv Sena (UBT), should have been more vigilant before the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections. “We should have looked into it earlier and been careful,” he noted, reflecting on MVA’s unexpected loss despite winning 31 of 48 Lok Sabha seats earlier that year.
Electoral Integrity and Rahul Gandhi’s Claims
Rahul Gandhi’s allegations of “institutionalized vote theft” through the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls have sparked significant debate. He claimed the ECI was colluding with the BJP to manipulate voter lists, particularly targeting the poor. Congress Working Committee member Gidugu Rudra Raju echoed these concerns, highlighting discrepancies in states like Maharashtra and Karnataka. Raju argued that the ECI’s refusal to provide electoral data in digital format enables malpractices favoring the BJP and its allies. Pawar supported Gandhi’s call for an ECI investigation, emphasizing the need for transparency in the electoral process.
MVA’s Challenges and Future Focus
Pawar’s remarks also shed light on the MVA’s challenges in Maharashtra. Despite a strong Lok Sabha performance, the coalition faced a setback in the 2024 Assembly elections, raising questions about electoral fairness. Raju noted that public awareness, amplified by media and social platforms, could counter such manipulations in future elections, like those in Bihar. Pawar urged his party workers to focus on upcoming local body elections, dismissing concerns about defections and emphasizing grassroots efforts to revive NCP-SP’s influence.
Clearing the Air on Controversies
Pawar also addressed a minor controversy regarding seating arrangements at a dinner hosted by Rahul Gandhi, where Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Uddhav Thackeray’s position sparked unnecessary speculation. He clarified that the seating was arranged for better visibility of a PowerPoint presentation, with leaders like Farooq Abdullah and Siddaramaiah also seated at the back. This explanation underscores Pawar’s intent to keep the focus on substantive issues rather than distractions.
| Topic | Details |
|---|---|
| Event | Press conference by NCP (SP) president Sharad Pawar in Nagpur |
| Date | Saturday, August 9, 2025 |
| Sharad Pawar on Rahul Gandhi’s “Vote Theft” Allegations | Called Rahul Gandhi’s presentation “well-researched” and “well-documented”; urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) to investigate the matter |
| Criticism of Opposition Strategy | Admitted, Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) should have been more careful before the Maharashtra elections |
| Rahul Gandhi’s Allegations | Admitted Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) should have been more careful before the Maharashtra elections |
| ECI Responsibility | Pawar: ECI must examine the proof presented by Gandhi |
| Uddhav Thackeray Seating Controversy | Pawar dismissed criticism, explaining seating was for better viewing of the presentation |
| Vice-Presidential Election | Opposition yet to decide stance on September 9 election |
| Alliance with Ajit Pawar? | Claimed Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was an “institutionalised theft” done with ECI’s collusion to benefit the BJP |
| Gidugu Rudra Raju’s Statement | Demanded ECI answer Rahul Gandhi’s five questions on voter list discrepancies in multiple states |
| Allegations Against ECI | Sharad Pawar denied any plan to join the BJP-led alliance |
| Election Results Doubts | Raju claimed ECI withheld digital electoral data to enable malpractice benefiting BJP |
| Future Political Predictions | MVA won 31/48 LS seats in 2024 but lost the Maharashtra Assembly elections soon after—raising suspicion |
| Congress in Andhra Pradesh | Raju claimed ECI withheld digital electoral data to enable malpractice benefiting the BJP |
| Revival Strategy | Raju predicted a BJP defeat in the upcoming Bihar elections despite alleged voter list manipulation |
Looking Ahead
As Maharashtra gears up for local body elections, Sharad Pawar’s rejection of a merger with Ajit Pawar’s faction signals a renewed push to consolidate NCP-SP’s base. His emphasis on ideological purity and electoral integrity resonates with supporters who value the party’s foundational principles. With the opposition still deliberating its stance on the Vice-Presidential election on September 9, 2025, Pawar’s leadership will be pivotal in shaping MVA’s strategy. For now, his clear stance against aligning with the BJP ensures that NCP-SP remains a distinct force in Maharashtra’s dynamic political landscape.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What did Sharad Pawar say about joining hands with Ajit Pawar?
Sharad Pawar firmly rejected the possibility of aligning with the ruling NCP faction led by his nephew Ajit Pawar. He stated, “We will never align with a BJP-led alliance,” making it clear that his faction remains committed to the Opposition.
2. What was Rahul Gandhi’s “vote theft” allegation?
Rahul Gandhi accused the Election Commission of India (ECI) of “institutionalised chori” (vote theft), claiming it was colluding with the BJP to manipulate electoral rolls and disenfranchise poor voters. His claims were supported by a detailed, well-documented presentation.
3. How did Sharad Pawar respond to Rahul Gandhi’s presentation?
Pawar praised Gandhi’s presentation as well-researched and evidence-backed. He said it is now the responsibility of the ECI to examine the matter seriously.
4. Why was there controversy over Uddhav Thackeray’s seating arrangement?
During a dinner meeting hosted by Rahul Gandhi, a minor controversy arose regarding Uddhav Thackeray’s seating at the back. Pawar dismissed the issue, explaining that those seated at the back, including himself and Farooq Abdullah, did so to better view the presentation—similar to choosing a seat at the back in a cinema.
5. What concerns did Gidugu Rudra Raju raise about the ECI?
Congress leader Gidugu Rudra Raju echoed Gandhi’s allegations, claiming that the ECI is not providing electoral data in digital format and is enabling malpractices that favor the BJP. He cited discrepancies in voter lists in states like Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Haryana.
6. How does this issue relate to recent elections in Maharashtra?
Raju pointed out that the Congress-led Maha Vikas Aghadi won 31 out of 48 Lok Sabha seats in 2024 but lost the Assembly elections just four months later under suspicious circumstances. He argued that public opinion rarely shifts so drastically in such a short span, raising questions about the integrity of the electoral process.