Muslim leaders call remarks divisive and insulting to Bihar’s voters; netizens condemn the Uttar Pradesh chief minister’s speech as ‘hate-driven’ and ‘unbecoming of a constitutional post’
PATNA – With less than a week to go before the first phase of polling in Bihar, political heat has intensified following Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s remarks during an election rally in Siwan. Addressing a gathering, Adityanath compared Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) candidate Osama Shahab, the son of late party strongman Mohammad Shahabuddin, to Osama bin Laden, triggering widespread anger and condemnation across political and social circles.
Adityanath said: “The RJD has fielded a candidate whose family background is known for criminal activities. Look at his name – as is the name, so is the nature.”
His statement instantly went viral on social media, drawing sharp criticism from political leaders, journalists, and citizens who accused the BJP of resorting to communal rhetoric to influence voters.
Prominent journalist Shams Aziz strongly criticised the the remarks, saying such comparisons were unacceptable and dangerous. “Chief Minister Yogi has compared Shahabuddin’s son Osama with Osama bin Laden,” Aziz said. “This is not just an insult to one candidate; it is an insult to every Muslim who names his child Osama. The country will never forgive such hate speech.”
Several Muslim intellectuals also voiced their anger. Dr Khalid Anwar, a Patna-based academic, said, “Osama is a common Arabic name meaning ‘lion’. To equate a person’s name with terrorism reveals a deep prejudice. Political leaders should rise above this mindset.”
He added, “If having a certain name makes one a terrorist, then what about others with mythological names? Are all Ravans evil because of their name? These statements divide society and mislead voters.”
The RJD quickly reacted to Adityanath’s remarks, calling them “a deliberate attempt to polarise voters.” A spokesperson said, “Osama Shahab is fighting this election democratically, as any citizen has the right to. He has no criminal record, and yet BJP leaders are trying to malign him just because of his name.”
He further asked, “If a name defines someone’s character, should the BJP’s own allies with controversial pasts be judged the same way? Chief Minister Yogi should remember that Bihar’s voters are wise enough to see through this kind of politics.”
The controversy deepened when several Muslim commentators and independent journalists mocked Yogi’s logic through biting sarcasm. One journalist wrote on X (formerly Twitter), “If Osama is a terrorist because of his name, then is Chandrashekhar Ravana also a demon? Or is Deputy CM Samrat Choudhary like Emperor Ashoka, who killed 99 of his brothers? What logic is this?”
This comment, widely shared online, highlighted the double standards in political discourse.
Political analyst Farhan Ahmed remarked, “The BJP has a pattern of branding opponents, especially Muslims, with negative stereotypes. Such comments are aimed at consolidating the Hindu vote, but they also expose the party’s fear of losing ground in Bihar.”
The controversy comes at a time when the Bihar Assembly Election 2025 is witnessing an aggressive campaign by both the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the Grand Alliance (Mahagathbandhan).
The NDA, led by the BJP and JD-U, is seeking a fifth consecutive term in power, while the opposition alliance led by Tejashwi Yadav’s RJD is attempting to dethrone the ruling coalition by focusing on unemployment, poverty, and governance failures.
Political observers believe that Yogi Adityanath’s comment may be an attempt to shift the focus away from economic and development issues towards communal polarisation.
“When political parties lack answers on governance, they turn towards religion and identity,” said Prof Abdul Bari, a political sociologist from Patna University. “It’s a tested formula – create division, brand minorities, and divert attention from real issues.”
Critics have also pointed out that while the BJP accuses others of supporting criminals, it has itself fielded candidates with questionable backgrounds. “The BJP talks about morality and law, but many of its own allies are facing serious criminal cases,” said social activist Rubina Khan. “The JD-U has given tickets to Anant Singh, and LJP has nominated Hulas Pandey. Even BJP’s own candidate Rajoo Kumar Singh has a criminal record. Then why single out Osama Shahab?”
She added that such selective targeting of Muslim candidates only deepens social distrust. “Every election, the same pattern repeats,” Rubina said. “Instead of discussing development, education, or jobs, leaders bring religion and names into the picture. This harms democracy.”
Responding to the controversy, RJD candidate Osama Shahab dismissed Yogi’s remarks, calling them “cheap political tactics.”
Speaking to reporters, he said, “I am proud of my name, proud of my father’s legacy, and proud to represent the people of Raghunathpur. I am fighting for development, employment, and justice – not for communal division.”
He added, “The BJP is scared. They know they have failed the youth of Bihar. So, they are trying to distract people with religious comments. But Bihar will give them a fitting reply through the ballot.”
Osama also clarified that his father, the late Mohammad Shahabuddin, despite his controversial image, “worked tirelessly for Siwan’s people and believed in secular values.”
The chief minister’s remarks have drawn thousands of reactions online, with many users condemning the speech as “hate-driven” and “unbecoming of a constitutional post.”
Hashtags such as #YogiAdityanath, #OsamaShahab, and #StopHatePolitics began trending soon after the rally.
A user wrote, “Yogi should know that names don’t make criminals; actions do. Using religion and names to divide people during elections is a new low.”
Others posted messages of support for Osama Shahab, praising his calm and mature response.
Political experts fear that such remarks could further communalise the Bihar elections, especially in districts like Siwan, Gopalganj, and Saran, where Muslims form a sizeable section of voters.
“Bihar has historically been known for its political maturity,” said Iqbal Haider, a retired civil servant. “But the current trend of dragging religion into every discussion is dangerous. It alienates communities and weakens social unity.”
He added that the focus should be on “employment, health, education, and safety”, not on “people’s names or religious backgrounds.”
Yogi Adityanath’s comment is not the first of its kind. Over the past few years, several BJP leaders have made remarks perceived as targeting minorities.
Analysts point out that such comments are often deliberate, designed to evoke emotional reactions and consolidate votes along religious lines.
“This is not accidental,” says Prof Bari. “It’s a well-calculated part of the campaign narrative. By invoking religion, they create an ‘us versus them’ sentiment that benefits the ruling party.”
At a time when India is struggling with unemployment, inflation, and rural distress, the use of religious and communal rhetoric in election campaigns raises serious questions about the direction of political discourse.
Many citizens believe that leaders like Yogi Adityanath should focus on governance rather than religious identity.
“People want jobs, not jibes,” said college student Sameer Alam in Siwan. “We are tired of hearing Hindu-Muslim debates. What about education, hospitals, and price rise? Those are our real issues.”
The controversy added another layer of tension to an already heated election season in Bihar. For many voters, the issue goes beyond one name or one candidate – it reflects the broader challenge of maintaining harmony in a society increasingly divided by religion and identity.
As one elderly voter in Siwan put it, “Bihar’s soil has produced great leaders like Jayaprakash Narayan and Karpoori Thakur. Our politics should be about justice and equality, not hatred and names.”
Whether this controversy will influence the outcome of the election remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the Muslim community, once again, finds itself unfairly targeted in a political contest that should have been about development, not division.
