Bhopal, January 18, 2026: Madhya Pradesh Congress MLA Phool Singh Baraiya has sparked a political and social uproar after remarks linking sexual violence to the physical appearance of women and claiming that certain religious scriptures incentivise assault on women from marginalised communities. The controversy has drawn condemnation from both state leadership and his own party, highlighting the sensitive intersection of caste, religion, and gender in India’s public discourse.

In an interview with a media outlet, a video of which circulated widely on Saturday, Baraiya claimed, “In India, most rapes are committed against Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Most Backward Classes. The theory of rape is that if any man, regardless of their mental state, sees a beautiful woman while walking down the street, their brain might become disturbed, and a rape could occur. Are there exceptionally beautiful women among the tribals or Scheduled Castes? Are there such beautiful women among the Most Backward Classes? Why does rape happen? Because their religious texts contain such instructions.”

He went on to assert that religious scriptures supposedly allowed sexual relations with women from SC, ST, and OBC communities, equating it with earning “teerth phal”, or the spiritual merit traditionally associated with going on a pilgrimage. Baraiya attempted to justify this by citing a Sanskrit verse, which he interpreted as prescribing a “reward” for sexual acts against women of certain castes, framing it as an alternative to formal religious rituals for those unable to go on pilgrimage.

The statements immediately triggered widespread outrage. Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Mohan Yadav condemned the MLA, stating, “By making such venomous statements, Baraiya is trying to spread social hatred in society. Now Rahul Gandhi, who is in Madhya Pradesh, should take action against him. It will be good to see whether Rahul Gandhi has respect for other castes too.” The chief minister’s remarks underscored the gravity of Baraiya’s comments in a state where caste sensitivities are politically and socially charged.

The Congress party quickly sought to distance itself from Baraiya’s remarks. Jitu Patwari, Congress MP and state party president, stated, “The Congress Party does not agree with such statements. He has been asked for clarification in this regard.” The party’s response reflected concern over potential backlash, both politically and socially, amid rising debates over caste, gender, and social justice in India.

As the row intensified, Baraiya issued a partial retraction. He claimed that the controversial statements were not his own, attributing them instead to Hari Mohan Jha, former head of the Philosophy Department in Bihar, from the book Khattar Kaka. He added, “I only quoted that statement in a specific context. I do not agree with it.” Despite this clarification, critics argued that his initial remarks reflected poor judgment and insensitivity to the plight of marginalised women, regardless of the source.

Experts on social and legal issues noted that Baraiya’s comments were not only factually misleading but also socially dangerous. Dr. Shweta Verma, a gender rights researcher, explained, “Linking sexual violence to the attractiveness of women or to any religious sanction is completely baseless and harmful. Statements like these perpetuate myths around consent and victim-blaming, and they can fuel caste-based discrimination and gender-based violence.”

Historically, discussions of caste and gender in India have been deeply sensitive. Women from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Classes have faced disproportionate vulnerability to sexual violence due to social and economic marginalisation. According to National Crime Records Bureau data, crimes against women from marginalised communities remain a serious concern, with systemic inequalities compounding risks of abuse. Baraiya’s remarks, by implying divine or religious sanction for violence, were seen by many as exacerbating these social inequalities rather than addressing them.

The controversy has also sparked reactions from civil society and human rights organisations. Several groups demanded legal action and political accountability, arguing that a public figure making such claims could incite social tensions. A petition circulated online called for both MLA Baraiya and the Congress leadership to publicly apologise and reaffirm their commitment to protecting the rights and dignity of women from marginalised communities.

Politically, the remarks come at a sensitive time for the Congress party in Madhya Pradesh, which faces criticism from opposition parties on issues related to caste, governance, and social justice. Analysts note that the party’s swift distancing from Baraiya reflects concern over potential electoral fallout, as the BJP and other opponents could exploit the controversy to question Congress’s sensitivity to social issues.

Legal experts have also weighed in on the matter. Advocate Ramesh Kumar, a criminal law specialist, noted, “Even if Baraiya’s comments were a quotation or interpretation from a text, presenting them as justification for rape or sexual violence can attract criminal scrutiny under laws related to hate speech and promoting enmity between groups.” India’s legal framework criminalises speech that promotes violence or discrimination, and public figures are held to heightened standards given their influence on society.

The episode underscores the challenges in addressing caste, gender, and religion in public discourse. It also highlights the ongoing need for political accountability, media literacy, and civic education to prevent the spread of harmful narratives. As public attention on Baraiya’s comments continues, it remains to be seen how the Congress party balances internal discipline with managing public perception, and how state authorities respond to calls for action against hate speech.

Meanwhile, women’s rights activists have called for broader reforms and awareness campaigns to combat the underlying social attitudes that perpetuate violence against women from marginalised communities. They argue that beyond condemning individual statements, political leaders must actively work to ensure that social narratives around gender and caste do not contribute to systemic violence or discrimination.

The controversy in Madhya Pradesh serves as a stark reminder of the persistent intersection of caste, gender, and politics in India. It also highlights the power of political rhetoric in shaping public discourse and social attitudes, with potential real-world consequences for vulnerable communities. As the debate unfolds, demands for accountability, education, and systemic change are likely to intensify, reflecting a broader societal imperative to protect the dignity and rights of all citizens, particularly women from marginalised groups.