Bhagwant Mann accuses the Centre of political vendetta over an alleged customs check at Delhi airport. (Img: X)
Chandigarh: Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann on Friday accused the Central government of targeting opposition leaders, linking his alleged detention at Delhi airport to what he described as a broader pattern of political vendetta. The Aam Aadmi Party leader raised the issue in the Punjab Assembly while members debated a resolution criticising the functioning of the Election Commission of India (ECI).
Mann said he had been deliberately harassed after returning from France, claiming that customs officials kept him waiting for approximately two hours while checking the luggage of his delegation. The BJP, however, maintained that the matter concerned fines over undeclared luxury items.
The competing accounts have turned the airport episode into a fresh political flashpoint, with the Punjab government also raising concerns about alleged deletions of eligible voters during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
Addressing the Punjab Assembly, Mann said the incident occurred when he returned from France after attending what he described as the world’s largest food festival. According to the Chief Minister, customs officials asked him to wait while they examined the baggage accompanying his delegation.
Mann alleged that officials found nothing objectionable in his luggage but referred to pressure from senior authorities concerning the delegation’s baggage. He further claimed that he eventually paid Rs 50,000 after officials indicated that the matter involved a fee, saying he was concerned about the consequences for the personnel involved.
The precise circumstances surrounding the payment, the nature of the alleged undeclared items and the customs department’s position were not established in the account presented in the Assembly. The BJP’s explanation and Mann’s allegations therefore remain competing versions of the incident.
The episode has raised questions about the circumstances of the airport check, but an official account from customs authorities would be necessary to establish the details and clarify the basis of any payment or penalty.
The Punjab Chief Minister also alleged a connection between a senior customs official, whom he identified as Manish, and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Mann suggested that this alleged relationship was relevant to his claim that he had been singled out for politically motivated treatment.
The allegation was made during his Assembly address. The account provided does not independently establish the claimed family relationship or demonstrate that it influenced the airport incident.
Mann widened his criticism by accusing the Centre of exerting influence over institutions that play a role in India’s democratic system. He argued that opposition leaders were being targeted and alleged that authorities were acting in disregard of legal safeguards and court rulings.
His remarks added to the political dispute between the AAP-led Punjab government and the BJP-led Centre, with the airport incident becoming part of a larger argument over institutional independence and the treatment of opposition parties.
The airport controversy unfolded during a debate on a resolution concerning the functioning of the Election Commission of India. Punjab Finance Minister Harpal Singh Cheema introduced the resolution, which raised concerns over the alleged removal of names of lakhs of eligible voters during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
Mann argued that alleged irregularities in the voter-list revision had undermined democratic participation. The AAP government’s position is that eligible voters should not lose their right to vote because of errors or omissions during the electoral-roll process.
The allegations concerning voter deletions require examination against official electoral data and the findings of the relevant authorities. Electoral-roll revisions are intended to update voter lists, but concerns over the exclusion of eligible electors can have significant implications for access to the ballot and public confidence in elections.
The resolution placed the Election Commission’s conduct at the centre of the Assembly debate and reflected the AAP government’s wider criticism of the electoral process.
During his address, Mann also referred to a separate case involving a 15-year-old girl who participated in a Gen Z protest in Noida. He alleged that the use of the National Security Act (NSA) in the case raised questions about the proportionality of official action and referred to a court intervention in Prayagraj.
The claim concerns a separate matter from the airport incident. The precise judicial findings, the circumstances of the case and the role of the individuals mentioned would need to be verified through court records and official statements before drawing conclusions.
By bringing up the case, Mann sought to support his broader argument that authorities were using their powers unfairly against people associated with opposition-linked protests. His allegations, however, should be distinguished from any findings formally established by a court.
The BJP’s response, as described in the available account, was that Mann faced fines over undeclared luxury items. This differs from the Chief Minister’s claim that the airport checks amounted to deliberate harassment.
A definitive account of what happened will depend on details including the customs department’s explanation, the recorded basis for any fine or payment, the baggage inspection findings and any relevant documentation.
The account provided does not include a detailed response from customs authorities addressing Mann’s allegations. Nor does it establish that the airport incident was ordered or influenced by political officials.
These unanswered questions are central to assessing the dispute fairly. While political leaders have the right to question official conduct, claims of targeted action and allegations of undeclared items require documentary evidence and responses from the authorities involved.
