Senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh has put Madhya Pradesh’s charged politics of faith back at the centre of public debate after declaring during an exchange with BJP legislator Usha Thakur that he was a “staunch Sanatani”.
The remark, made during a public interaction in Indore, quickly travelled across social media, drawing commentary from both Congress and BJP circles at a time when the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex dispute in Dhar has already heightened political and religious sensitivities across the state.
Singh, a former Madhya Pradesh chief minister and a veteran Congress strategist, made the comment after Thakur, a BJP MLA and former state minister, questioned his position on Sanatan Dharma and the Bhojshala verdict. The exchange took place at Residency Kothi in Indore, where Singh had arrived after visiting the city to pay condolences following the death of former Congress MLA Ashwin Joshi.
Responding to Thakur’s remarks, Singh said he had long identified with Sanatan Dharma and pointed to his Narmada Parikrama and observance of Ekadashi fasts as markers of personal faith. He also questioned the suggestion that he had opposed the Bhojshala ruling, saying his concerns were about the legal interpretation of a protected monument rather than any rejection of faith.
The exchange was striking because Singh has often been targeted by BJP leaders as being hostile to Hindu causes, a charge he has repeatedly rejected. His assertion that he was a “ghor Sanatani” gave Congress workers a line of defence while offering the BJP fresh ground to frame the party’s position as politically reactive rather than rooted in conviction.
The timing has amplified the political weight of the statement. The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled in favour of Hindu worship rights at the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex, a protected monument in Dhar that has long been claimed by Hindu groups as a temple dedicated to Vagdevi, or Saraswati, and by the Muslim side as the Kamal Maula Mosque. The court’s order has altered the status quo that had allowed Hindus to offer prayers on Tuesdays and Muslims to offer namaz on Fridays under an Archaeological Survey of India arrangement dating back to 2003.
After the verdict, devotees gathered at the site for prayers and rituals, while Muslim representatives signalled plans to challenge the ruling before the Supreme Court. The legal dispute is therefore far from settled, even as political mobilisation around the issue has intensified.
Singh has described the High Court verdict as vague and argued that an ASI-protected monument cannot be treated as a regular place of worship. His critics have read that position as opposition to Hindu claims over Bhojshala, while his supporters have framed it as a constitutional and legal argument about heritage management, archaeological protection and religious access.
For the BJP, the episode fits into a wider political strategy in Madhya Pradesh, where religious identity and cultural heritage have become central campaign themes. Usha Thakur, known for her assertive Hindutva politics, used the encounter to press Singh publicly on whether he accepted Sanatan Dharma and the Bhojshala order. Her intervention turned what may otherwise have remained a legal debate into a highly visible political exchange.
Congress faces a more complicated task. The party has sought to counter the BJP’s dominance in faith-linked narratives without appearing to imitate its ideological pitch. Singh’s statement reflects that balancing act. By asserting his own religious practice, he attempted to separate personal faith from political Hindutva, while also resisting the BJP’s effort to define who qualifies as a believer.
The Bhojshala dispute has a long and layered history. Dhar was associated with Raja Bhoj of the Paramara dynasty, and Hindu groups have argued that the structure was once a centre of Sanskrit learning and worship. Muslim representatives have maintained that the site has also functioned as a mosque over centuries. The ASI survey and the High Court proceedings have revived old claims, placing archaeological evidence, religious memory and legal interpretation in direct contest.
Madhya Pradesh’s political climate gives the controversy wider resonance. The BJP remains organisationally dominant in the state, while Congress is trying to rebuild its cadre strength after repeated electoral setbacks. Singh, despite questions over his long-term parliamentary role, remains one of the party’s most recognisable faces in the state and continues to shape its ideological messaging.
The viral exchange has also shown how quickly local political encounters now become statewide narratives. A short conversation at an Indore venue has moved through social media, party networks and television debates, turning Singh’s personal claim of faith into a broader argument over Congress’s positioning on religion.
