Rahul Gandhi voiced strong support for the Youth Congress members who staged a shirtless protest during the AI Summit, praising them as “babbar sher,” or lion-hearted, for their actions. Speaking at a party gathering in Delhi, the Leader of the Opposition referred to the incident while criticising the Narendra Modi government’s approach to artificial intelligence and data policy. He remarked that the Youth Congress workers had taken bold action at the summit and alleged that the government’s AI push lacked substance. Gandhi argued that artificial intelligence depends on data and accused the Prime Minister of compromising national interests by handing over critical data to the United States, claiming the country had been misled on the issue.
The protest he referred to took place on February 20 at the AI Summit held at Bharat Mandapam in central Delhi, an event attended by international leaders and prominent technology executives. A group of Youth Congress members entered a hall inside the venue and removed their shirts in a dramatic demonstration that drew widespread attention. The protest was organised against a proposed India–US trade agreement, which the Congress party alleged would harm farmers’ interests. Law enforcement agencies subsequently detained several participants, and about fourteen Youth Congress leaders, including president Uday Bhanu Chib, were arrested in connection with the disruption.
The Bharatiya Janata Party responded sharply, claiming Gandhi’s public praise indicated that the protest had been orchestrated with his knowledge and backing. Party leaders described the demonstration as a calculated attempt to embarrass India during a high-profile international event. According to the BJP, the remarks reinforced their charge that the episode was not spontaneous but a planned political stunt designed to generate controversy on a global platform.
BJP IT Cell chief Amit Malviya countered Gandhi’s position by invoking a historical episode involving India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Malviya referred to the succession debate in the Indore royal family after the death of Maharaja Yeshwantrao Holkar II in the 1950s. He said the question at the time was whether the Maharaja’s American-born son, Richard Holkar, could inherit the royal legacy. Following deliberations, Malviya noted, the government led by Nehru took the position that succession should pass to a child born of an Indian mother, leading to the recognition of Usha Devi Raje Sahib Holkar, the Maharaja’s daughter from his Indian wife, as the rightful inheritor.
Drawing a parallel from the episode, Malviya argued that issues of national identity and loyalty had once been treated as matters rooted in origin and belonging. He suggested that Gandhi’s present stance overlooked what he described as Nehru’s emphasis on national character, using the historical example to question the Congress leader’s political messaging.
