New Delhi’s political corridors are buzzing with sharp exchanges over AIMIM’s appeal to shut liquor shops during Ramadan. On Thursday, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) national spokesperson Vinod Bansal fired back with a provocative retort that has sparked widespread debate.
Speaking exclusively to IANS, Bansal questioned the logic behind AIMIM’s stance. ‘This party needs to first decide: if they claim not to drink alcohol in life, why do they speak of rivers of wine in paradise after death? They want alcohol, youth, and 72 houris there. To get that, they mislead Muslim youth into terrorism under the guise of jihad,’ he said.
Bansal’s comments cut deep into religious narratives, challenging AIMIM to clarify their position. ‘If they want booze in heaven, why demand shops close here? Sort this out first before pushing for bans,’ he added, urging consistency in their demands.
The controversy extends to workplace policies. Discussions in Maharashtra about granting leave to Muslim employees during Ramadan, similar to Telangana, drew Bansal’s ire. ‘Such moves push the country toward division. Communal appeasement is wrong, and Telangana should avoid it. In Maharashtra, it’s impossible. Abu Azmi, pushing for these leaves, is like the father of terrorists— he should think before speaking,’ Bansal remarked.
He also targeted Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind chief Maulana Arshad Madani over his reaction to ‘ghar wapsi’ (homecoming). ‘Muslim leaders should guide youth toward righteousness, not violence. Madani gets agitated over a small word like ghar wapsi, forgetting his mother’s milk. Those who claim not to fear anyone tremble at homecoming,’ Bansal quipped.
This exchange highlights deepening political fault lines, with VHP positioning itself firmly against what it sees as selective religious accommodations. As Ramadan approaches, expect more heated rhetoric in India’s diverse political landscape.