 calls it anti-constitutional){kind=link}
gartala: Tripura politics witnessed fresh controversy after Tipra Motha supremo Pradyot Kishore Debbarma made a fiery speech at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, declaring himself the “owner” of Agartala, Teliamura, and Kanchanpur. His remarks, coupled with emotional appeals, have sparked widespread criticism and debate across party lines.
CPI(M) reaction: CPI(M) state secretary and veteran tribal leader Jitendra Chowdhury strongly criticized the statement, calling it “anti-democratic and anti-constitutional.”
Congress response: On the other hand, senior Congress MLA Sudip Roy Barman delivered a balanced response, highlighting that Tripura belongs to all its people.
“The Indian National Flag was behind him, and I believe Pradyot Kishore Debbarma has faith in the Constitution. Tripura belongs to everyone—people of all faiths, castes, and communities. India is ruled by the Constitution, and princely states no longer exist,” Roy Barma said at Congress Bhawan.
He further alleged that Pradyot’s controversial outburst stemmed from political frustration. Pointing to the BJP’s failure to implement the Tiprasa Accord, Roy Barma remarked: “He had promised a Constitutional solution within six months and even made his sister an MP on that assurance. Now, with elections to Village Committees and the TTAADC approaching, he is struggling to face the people and resorting to divisive rhetoric.”
Common ground: Despite his criticism, Roy Barma agreed with Pradyot on the need for greater empowerment of the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (TTAADC). He stressed the urgency of passing the 125th Constitutional Amendment Bill in Parliament to ensure genuine political, social, and economic empowerment for Tripura’s indigenous population.
On the Tiprasa Accord, however, the Congress leader was dismissive, describing it as “vague” and lacking in concrete provisions, which has left Pradyot unable to secure meaningful outcomes from the Centre.
Political impact: Pradyot Kishore’s rhetoric has reignited debates on Tripura’s tribal issues and his leadership style. Critics accuse him of relying on emotional outbursts and political theatrics rather than providing practical solutions, even as the indigenous question remains one of the most pressing issues in Tripura’s political landscape.