A sharp confrontation unfolded in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly after BJP legislators accused the Congress-led state government of phone tapping at the Governor’s residence, triggering a noisy protest inside the House.
The dispute began when Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H. K. Patil stated during discussions that Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot had been receiving directions from New Delhi via phone calls. His comment, made during the Motion of Thanks to the Governor’s address, immediately drew objections from the opposition.
BJP MLA Suresh Kumar referred to a past controversy involving former Governor H. R. Bharadwaj in 2011 and questioned the conduct of the current government. He argued that Patil’s remark raised serious concerns and could erode public confidence in both the government and the Assembly. He directly asked whether phones at Lok Bhavan were being monitored and called on the minister to clarify.
The debate soon turned chaotic, with BJP members demanding proof to back the claim. As tensions rose, IT Minister Priyank Kharge countered by alleging that calls to the Governor’s residence were also coming from Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s state headquarters at Keshava Krupa, shifting the focus back toward the BJP ecosystem.
With the House in disorder, Speaker U. T. Khader adjourned proceedings for lunch. Even after the session resumed, the issue continued to dominate discussions.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah later intervened to calm the situation, firmly stating that his government neither engages in nor supports phone tapping. He clarified that Patil’s comment was an inference rather than a factual assertion and assured the House that no one—whether from the ruling side or opposition—would be subjected to surveillance.
The controversy comes amid ongoing strain between the Governor and the state government. On January 22, Gehlot declined to read the full state-prepared address to a joint legislative session and limited himself to a brief three-line statement, which drew criticism from the Congress government. Reports indicated he had reservations about portions critical of the Centre and references related to MGNREGA, reflecting broader friction between the Raj Bhavan and the state administration.
