
Home Minister Amit Shah has accused the Congress of displaying a "Jinnah mindset" over its decision to sing only two stanzas of Vande Mataram, calling the party's 1937 resolution on the matter…
Home Minister Amit Shah has accused the Congress of displaying a "Jinnah mindset" over its decision to sing only two stanzas of Vande Mataram, calling the party's 1937 resolution on the matter a "historic mistake" that sowed the seeds of Partition. Shah said the BJP will take its campaign against the Congress stand to Parliament and state assemblies, and exhorted people to rally against the opposition party. Union Minister Jitan Ram Manjhi also weighed in, warning that the "tukde-tukde gang" would face public anger if the issue persisted.

Times of India reports that Shah linked the 1937 Congress decision to appeasement of the Muslim League, and said the Modi government corrected it by mandating the full version of the national song at all government functions and giving it legal protection. Congress has defended its position, saying the two-stanza resolution was adopted in the presence of Mahatma Gandhi, Nehru, Bose and Tagore. Times Now reports the debate has raised the question of whether "vote bhakti" is taking precedence over "desh bhakti".
All three sources cover the BJP's attack on Congress over Vande Mataram, with Times of India providing the most detailed account of Amit Shah's speech linking the 1937 resolution to Partition. India TV and Times Now amplify the political rhetoric without adding independent reporting. The sources uniformly report the BJP's framing that Congress appeased Muslims in 1937, but none quote any Congress leader's response beyond the party's defensive statement about the resolution's authors. The measured read: this is a political flashpoint ahead of Parliament, where the BJP will use the nationalism plank to corner the opposition. Watch for the BJP's national office-bearers meeting on Saturday.
Coverage: 3 sources, 2 neutral, 1 sensationalist
Sources (3): indiatvnews.com (neutral report), timesnownews.com (sensationalist), timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report)
This story was synthesised by AI from the 3 sources linked above.
Updated: this story now draws on 3 sources.