Can Jammu and Kashmir Witness a Maharashtra or Bengal-Style Political Upheaval?
![Omar Alleges Bid to Split NC, Claims MLA Offered ₹20–30 Crore to Defect Srinagar, July 11, KNT: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Saturday accused the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of attempting to destabilize the National Conference-led government, alleging that one of his party's legislators from the Jammu region was offered between ₹20 crore and ₹30 crore, a ministerial berth and political assurances to defect in what he described as a failed bid to engineer a split in the ruling party. Addressing a gathering after paying tributes to Begum Akbar Jehan at Naseem Bagh, Omar claimed the offer was allegedly conveyed through a Supreme Court lawyer associated with the BJP, who, according to him, assured the legislator that statehood would be restored if he switched allegiance. Declaring that the National Conference would not succumb to pressure or inducements, the Chief Minister warned the BJP against attempting to enter government through what he termed "the back door", asserting that the party's patience should never be misconstrued as weakness. Turning his attack towards the Centre, Omar questioned why an elected government was being forced to stage a protest in New Delhi nearly two years after assuming office merely to seek restoration of Jammu and Kashmir's statehood. He said he had deliberately adopted the path of dialogue instead of confrontation, despite being aware that the approach would invite political criticism within Jammu and Kashmir. "I staked my political credibility on the assurance that the promises made to the people of Jammu and Kashmir would be honoured. I believed dialogue would succeed where confrontation would not. Unfortunately, our patience has been rewarded with continued delay," he said. The Chief Minister as per the news agency Kashmir News Trust reminded the Centre that it had assured the Supreme Court that statehood would be restored after the completion of delimitation and Assembly elections. Both processes, he said, had concluded, yet the commitment remained unfulfilled. Questioning the delimitation exercise, Omar alleged that Jammu and Kashmir had witnessed a politically motivated exercise designed to benefit the BJP. Despite what he termed an attempt to tilt the electoral balance, he said the electorate had defeated those designs by handing the National Conference a decisive mandate. "Our victory has become our punishment," he remarked, questioning why elections were held if the intention was to continue governing Jammu and Kashmir through Raj Bhavan instead of respecting the mandate of an elected government. Escalating his criticism, Omar alleged that the Centre had responded positively to political demands from Ladakh while ignoring similar concerns raised by the elected government in Jammu and Kashmir. He claimed that while Ladakh was being engaged on constitutional safeguards, Jammu and Kashmir continued to be denied even routine administrative powers, including the appointment of officers. The Chief Minister said he had repeatedly raised the issue of statehood with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah but was consistently told that restoration would take place at an "appropriate time." "What is this appropriate time? Tell us what more remains to be done. If the appropriate time means the formation of a BJP government in Jammu and Kashmir, then say so openly before Parliament and the people," he said. Rejecting criticism over the National Conference's decision to invite political parties and civil society members for the proposed July 20 protest at Jantar Mantar, Omar asserted that the struggle for statehood transcended party politics. "Statehood does not belong to Omar Abdullah or Dr. Farooq Abdullah. It belongs to every citizen of Jammu and Kashmir. That is why we have invited everyone to join this movement," he said. [KNT]](https://newsagencyknt.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Chief-Minister-Omar-780x470.png)
A series of statements by Leader of Opposition Sunil Sharma on the stability of the Omar Abdullah-led government, coupled with the ruling National Conference’s high-profile meeting at Dachigam, has triggered renewed political speculation over a question that until recently appeared unthinkable: could Jammu and Kashmir witness a Maharashtra or West Bengal-style political upheaval?
The discussion has gained momentum amid political developments elsewhere in the country where internal party revolts have transformed governments and altered political equations.
The immediate trigger in Jammu and Kashmir has been the repeated assertion by Sunil Sharma that the present government is unstable and his suggestion that the ruling dispensation faces internal challenges. The remarks were followed by a day-long meeting of National Conference legislators, ministers and Members of Parliament at Dachigam chaired by Chief Minister Omar Abdullah.
Officially, the National Conference described the gathering as a routine review of governance, organizational affairs and public issues. However, in political circles, the meeting was widely interpreted as an exercise aimed at assessing internal cohesion and sending a message of unity amid growing speculation.
The comparisons being drawn with Maharashtra and the emerging developments in West Bengal stem from a common factor: internal dissent rather than external opposition.
In Maharashtra, the political landscape changed dramatically when Eknath Shinde and a large group of legislators challenged the leadership of Uddhav Thackeray while claiming to represent the “real” Shiv Sena.
In West Bengal, political observers are closely watching reports of dissident legislators asserting that they represent the “real” Trinamool Congress rather than positioning themselves as defectors.
The crucial distinction in both cases was that the battle was not initially about forming a new party but about control of the existing one.
Can such a scenario emerge in Jammu and Kashmir?
Political observers point to several factors that make Jammu and Kashmir different.
The National Conference remains one of the oldest and most deeply rooted political organizations in the region. Historically, large-scale defections from the party have been rare.
Also Read: Is West Bengal Witnessing a Maharashtra-Like Political Script?
Yet history also offers a reminder that political certainties can change. The most notable example remains the 1984 split when a group of National Conference legislators withdrew support from Farooq Abdullah, paving the way for Ghulam Mohammad Shah to assume power.
Another factor frequently discussed is the role of independent legislators and smaller political groups that support governments. Unlike ideologically committed party cadres, such support structures are often viewed as more fluid in parliamentary politics.
At present, there is no public evidence of any organized rebellion within the ruling party. Neither has any National Conference legislator publicly questioned Omar Abdullah’s leadership nor has any group emerged claiming to represent an alternative power center within the party.
Yet the persistence of the political conversation itself is noteworthy.
The opposition continues to talk about instability while the ruling party has increasingly emphasized unity and cohesion.
Whether this reflects ordinary political sparring or early signs of a larger contest remains unclear.
For now, the Omar Abdullah government remains firmly in office. But the debate unfolding in political circles underscores a broader reality of contemporary Indian politics: governments are no longer challenged only by electoral opponents. Increasingly, the greatest threats emerge from battles within political parties themselves.
That is the lesson Maharashtra offered. It is the question now being asked in West Bengal. And it is the speculation that has quietly entered Jammu and Kashmir’s political discourse. [KNT]
© Kashmir News Trust (KNT). Unauthorized use without attribution is prohibited.
