Opposition parties in Assam have sharpened their attack on Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma after a television interview in which he spoke about Bangladesh, so-called pushback operations and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, prompting rivals to question his judgment and accuse him of eroding constitutional norms ahead of a highly charged electoral season. The fiercest criticism came from Leader of the Opposition Debabrata Saikia, who said Sarma had made “undemocratic, irresponsible and irrelevant” remarks that diminished the dignity of the chief minister’s office. Saikia said the comments showed “arrogance of power” and described Sarma as an “autocrat intoxicated with arrogance”, arguing that Assam needed leadership anchored in restraint and democratic values rather than provocation.
The confrontation was triggered by Sarma’s remarks in an interview in which he discussed allegations made by Congress leader Pawan Khera against his wife, infiltration across the Bangladesh border, deportation policy, India-Bangladesh relations and Rahul Gandhi. According to accounts of the interview carried by multiple outlets, Sarma said Assam conducted pushback operations by “taking advantage of darkness” in stretches where there was no security presence on the Bangladesh side, and also said he prayed ties between India and Bangladesh would never improve because closer relations created difficulties for Assam.
Those remarks gave the opposition an opening to widen its assault beyond personal rhetoric. Saikia said a chief minister publicly speaking in those terms amounted to an admission of conduct that raised questions over legality, diplomacy and national security. He also accused Sarma of making irresponsible observations on foreign policy, a domain not controlled by state governments, and said the comments risked projecting Assam as a theatre of executive overreach rather than orderly administration.
The row intensified further after Sarma was reported to have called Rahul Gandhi “mad” and in need of treatment, while referring to an analysis generated by Grok. Saikia responded that invoking an artificial intelligence tool to deride the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha reflected political bankruptcy, and turned the charge back on Sarma by saying such language had itself called the chief minister’s mental balance into question. That exchange has since become one of the most discussed flashpoints in Assam’s election discourse.
Regional opposition figures added to the criticism in even harsher language. Public reports from Assam indicated that rivals described Sarma’s line of argument as illogical and imbalanced, with some branding him a “psychological case” and arguing that his style of politics had become increasingly personalised and combative. The pattern is consistent with a broader campaign season in which sharp-edged personal attacks have often overshadowed debate on jobs, prices, flood control, land rights and public services.
Sarma’s supporters and the BJP have not offered a detailed rebuttal to every opposition charge in this episode, and one report said the party declined to comment on the contents of the interview when approached. Even so, the chief minister’s politics have long relied on direct, polarising messaging around migration, border security and identity, themes that continue to resonate with a section of the electorate in Assam. Reuters reported last year that his government’s evictions and expulsions targeting Bengali-speaking Muslims had drawn criticism from rights groups and opposition leaders, while Sarma framed the issue as resistance to unchecked infiltration and demographic change.
That context matters because the latest war of words is unfolding against an active election backdrop. The Election Commission announced the 2026 Assam assembly poll process in March, voting was held on April 9, and counting is due on May 4. Turnout figures reported this week pointed to exceptionally high participation, suggesting that a deeply polarised campaign has also energised voters. In such an atmosphere, language from senior leaders tends to carry heavier political consequences than it might during an ordinary legislative session.
The Pawan Khera controversy has also fed into the wider narrative. Congress allegations involving Riniki Bhuyan Sharma led to legal action, transit anticipatory bail for Khera in Telangana and then a setback when the Supreme Court stayed that relief and said he could seek bail in the appropriate court in Assam. That sequence has reinforced opposition claims that politics, policing and legal pressure are becoming tightly fused in the state’s campaign environment, while the BJP continues to portray the allegations against the chief minister’s family as defamatory and politically motivated.