A major political controversy has erupted after BJP MP Nishikant Dubey allegedly referred to former Odisha Chief Minister Biju Patnaik as a “CIA agent,” triggering strong reactions and protests from the Biju Janata Dal (BJD).
In response, BJD MP Sasmit Patra resigned from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and IT, which is chaired by Dubey. In his resignation letter to the Rajya Sabha Chairperson, Patra stated that he could not continue serving under someone who had made what he described as disrespectful remarks about Biju Patnaik. He termed his decision a matter of principle.
The controversy stems from Dubey’s alleged statement claiming that Biju Patnaik acted as a link between former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the CIA during the 1960s. The remarks sparked protests in Parliament, with BJD members strongly objecting and staging a walkout from the Rajya Sabha while demanding an apology.
During the proceedings, Patra condemned the statement as false and defamatory, calling it shameful and unacceptable. He accused the ruling party of lowering the level of political discourse.
BJD president Naveen Patnaik also reacted sharply, describing the remarks as “outrageous” and stating that Dubey required the attention of a medical professional for making such claims. Recalling historical events, he emphasised Biju Patnaik’s contributions during the 1962 India-China conflict, highlighting his efforts in support of the nation.
Biju Patnaik, a prominent political figure and freedom fighter, served as Odisha’s Chief Minister twice, from 1961 to 1963 and again from 1990 to 1995. He was also known for his achievements as an aviator, including a daring mission in 1947 to assist Indonesian independence leaders. For his role, he received honours from Indonesia, including rare recognition as a foreign national.
Following his death in 1997, his son Naveen Patnaik founded the Biju Janata Dal, which went on to dominate Odisha politics for over two decades before losing power in the 2024 Assembly elections.
The episode has intensified political tensions, with demands for accountability and apologies, and has expanded into a broader debate over historical interpretation and respect for prominent leaders.
