In a recent development, Samajwadi Party Chief Akhilesh Yadav has sparked a major controversy by demanding a DNA test for the accused in the Ayodhya gangrape case. This demand has led to intense debate and criticism from various political quarters in Uttar Pradesh.
Details of the Ayodhya Gangrape Case
On July 30, Ayodhya Police arrested Samajwadi functionary Moid Khan, who operates a bakery in Bhadarsa Nagar, along with his employee Raju Khan. They are accused of raping a 12-year-old girl over a period of two months. The horrific nature of the crime became evident when it was revealed that the girl became pregnant due to the assault.
Akhilesh Yadav’s Statement and Its Implications
On Saturday, Akhilesh Yadav took to X (formerly Twitter) to call for a DNA test for the accused. He stated, “In cases of misdeeds, justice should be sought through DNA tests of the accused, not just through allegations and politics.” Yadav emphasized that anyone found guilty should face full legal consequences, but if the allegations proved false, government officials involved should also face repercussions.
Political Reactions to Yadav’s Call for DNA Testing
Yadav’s statement quickly drew criticism from various political parties. The BJP accused the Samajwadi Party of defending “paedophilia” and exhibiting a “boys will be boys” mentality. BJP IT Chief Amit Malviya criticized the party for allegedly prioritizing Muslim appeasement over justice for the minor victim, claiming that the Samajwadi Party has historically exploited backward communities.
Criticism from the BJP and Other Parties
Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya criticized Yadav, accusing him of trying to protect his vote bank rather than focusing on justice for the victim. Maurya argued that Yadav’s shift in focus to DNA testing was a distraction from the need for justice and appropriate punishment for the guilty.
Opposition Leaders Weigh In
Bahujan Samaj Party Chief Mayawati also weighed in, questioning the relevance of Yadav’s DNA test demand. She pointed out that during the tenure of the previous Samajwadi Party government, DNA tests were not a standard practice, implying that the demand now may be politically motivated rather than a genuine pursuit of justice.
National Commission for Protection of Child Rights Response
Priyank Kanoongo, chairperson of the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), criticized Yadav for his stance. Kanoongo reminded the public of Mulayam Singh Yadav’s controversial remarks from 2014 and condemned the defense of accused individuals in cases of sexual assault, highlighting the need for accountability rather than diversionary tactics.
Conclusion: The Future of the Ayodhya Case
The demand for DNA testing by Akhilesh Yadav has introduced a new dimension to the Ayodhya gangrape case. As political reactions continue to unfold, the focus remains on ensuring justice for the victim while navigating the complex political landscape surrounding this tragic incident.
