Pune, January 3, 2026 – Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar on Saturday responded sharply to criticism from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) over the criminal backgrounds of several NCP candidates contesting the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) elections. Pawar, without naming the BJP directly, drew attention to the irony of facing criticism from those who had previously levelled allegations against him, asserting that accusations do not equate to guilt.

The controversy erupted after BJP leaders, including former Pune mayor Murlidhar Mohol, questioned the NCP’s decision to field candidates with criminal records. Mohol had highlighted what he described as a contradiction in Pawar’s stance: on one hand, the deputy chief minister has repeatedly emphasized the need to tackle crime in Pune, and on the other, several of the candidates fielded by his party allegedly have criminal cases pending against them. “If you look at the list of candidates given by his side, from East Pune to South and North Pune, it clearly shows what kind of elements they have accommodated,” Mohol told the media.

In his response, Ajit Pawar recalled the time when allegations of an irrigation scam were made against him, reportedly involving financial irregularities worth around ₹70,000 crore in state irrigation projects. “The people who made those allegations against me, are they all with me today or not?” Pawar asked during a media interaction, highlighting how political adversaries eventually reconciled and became part of the same government. By framing the criticism in this context, Pawar appeared to draw a parallel between historical allegations against him and the current scrutiny of NCP candidates, suggesting that accusations do not automatically translate into culpability.

Pawar also challenged the broader assumption about criminal cases, questioning, “If a crime is registered against someone tomorrow, does that person become guilty even before the crime is proven?” His remarks were aimed at the BJP’s critique of NCP candidates with pending cases, emphasizing the distinction between allegations, ongoing investigations, and proven guilt under the law.

Further, he drew attention to procedural lapses in the political sphere, stating, “I want to ask those who are questioning us: they should see who helped a person to abscond, and take out the record of the last 15 years, how many candidates with criminal backgrounds have been filled by whom?” Through this, Pawar sought to turn the focus on BJP’s own record in civic and state elections, framing the debate as a question of consistency and accountability across political parties.

The political face-off over candidate selection comes as the PMC elections approach, with both the NCP and the BJP contesting the civic polls separately despite being coalition partners in the state government. Analysts note that municipal elections often serve as a litmus test for public sentiment, and issues like candidate backgrounds, governance record, and local development often dominate the discourse. In Pune, the NCP has sought to leverage its organizational strength and local networks, while the BJP is aiming to consolidate its voter base amid criticisms of governance lapses in select civic wards.

Adding another layer to the political narrative, Pawar has reunited with Sharad Pawar’s faction of the NCP ahead of the PMC elections. This reunification strengthens the party’s position in Pune and signals efforts to consolidate the Mahayuti alliance in urban contests, even as it competes against coalition partners at the local level. Political observers say such strategic maneuvering reflects the increasingly complex dynamics of Maharashtra politics, where alliances at the state level coexist with rivalries in local elections.

The remarks by Ajit Pawar also highlight the ongoing debate in Indian politics about candidates with criminal records. Election Commission data has often revealed that a significant proportion of candidates contesting municipal, assembly, and parliamentary elections have pending cases ranging from minor offenses to serious charges. While legal experts emphasize the principle of presumed innocence until proven guilty, opposition parties frequently use such cases to question the ethical and governance standards of ruling parties.

Pune, as Maharashtra’s cultural and IT hub, has seen heightened political engagement ahead of the PMC elections, with civic issues such as waste management, traffic, water supply, and public safety forming the core of electoral debates. Against this backdrop, the discussion about candidate backgrounds adds a moral and legal dimension, influencing voters’ perceptions of party credibility.

Ajit Pawar’s statements, therefore, serve both as a defensive posture against BJP criticism and a broader commentary on political accountability. By juxtaposing historical allegations against him with the present scrutiny of NCP candidates, Pawar has reframed the narrative, asserting that unresolved or pending cases should not automatically disqualify political actors from contesting elections or serving in public office.

As the PMC elections draw nearer, both parties are expected to intensify their campaigns, highlighting governance achievements, local development initiatives, and candidate credentials. Political analysts suggest that debates over criminal records, allegations, and political history are likely to play a crucial role in shaping voter sentiment, especially among urban electorates who are increasingly attentive to issues of transparency, accountability, and lawfulness in local governance.

The unfolding situation in Pune exemplifies the broader tension in Indian politics between coalition governance at the state level and competitive politics at the municipal or local level. While the NCP and BJP collaborate in Maharashtra’s state government, local elections often become arenas for political contestation, strategic positioning, and public scrutiny.

In conclusion, Ajit Pawar’s remarks reflect a calculated political response that blends legal reasoning, historical context, and strategic counter-narrative. By emphasizing the distinction between allegations and proven guilt, drawing parallels with past experiences, and questioning the opposition’s consistency, Pawar has attempted to neutralize criticism while reinforcing the NCP’s electoral strategy in Pune. The coming weeks are likely to see intensified debates, media coverage, and public engagement, as both parties seek to secure a decisive mandate in the municipal elections that could influence future political alignments in Maharashtra.