Arise Bharat

Congress leaders frequently invoke their legacy in India’s history, but their actions suggest a disturbing trend: a wilful distortion of historical facts, seemingly aimed at gaining recognition from Delhi’s political establishment and fleeting fame.

A recent and telling example is the statement made by the Honourable Chief Minister of Telangana, Shri Revanth Reddy.

In a Facebook post, he wrote: “RSS leader Golwalkar argued in the Constituent Assembly that Dalits, Adivasis and minorities should not have the right to vote in this country. Gandhiji and Ambedkar insisted that they should have the right to vote.”

This is not a matter of interpretation or misunderstanding; it is a question of intent. To argue in the Constituent Assembly, one had to be a member of it. Membership was determined through indirect elections from provincial assemblies and nominations from princely states under the 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan. Shri M.S. Golwalkar was never a member of the Constituent Assembly, and therefore could not have participated in its proceedings.

The reference to Mahatma Gandhi as a participant in the Constituent Assembly further exposes the deliberate nature of the distortion. Gandhiji’s moral authority in the freedom movement is unquestionable, but he never contested an election in his lifetime and was never a member of the Constituent Assembly. These are settled, elementary facts. Presenting them otherwise cannot be dismissed as error—it amounts to intentional misrepresentation.

The language and approach adopted by Shri Revanth Reddy follow a well-worn Congress script. In 2016, Shri Rahul Gandhi—after making sweeping public accusations—backtracked before the Supreme Court, stating that he never meant to accuse the entire RSS of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, a retreat made in the face of criminal defamation proceedings. The sequence was revealing: provocation first, retraction later.

Shri Revanth Reddy now appears to be treading the same path—employing the same hostile vocabulary and targeting the same organisation, seemingly to signal ideological loyalty and curry favour with party leadership, rather than to uphold historical truth.

Such rhetoric is particularly regrettable when directed against an organisation that, irrespective of political differences, is widely acknowledged for its decades of service and contribution to the nation.

This isn’t history rewritten casually; it’s a wilful distortion of constitutional facts for controversy and short-term visibility. . When such distortions emanate from the office of a Chief Minister, they erode the seriousness of public discourse and diminish institutional credibility.