Amit Shah vs. Thackeray: The Impeachment Row That Reignited the Hindutva War

The bitter rivalry between Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray exploded into a fresh confrontation this week over an opposition move to impeach Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madras High Court. The flashpoint was the judge's order permitting the lighting of a lamp near a dargah—a directive the INDIA bloc labeled as biased but Shah defended as a matter of religious freedom. Shah slammed the impeachment motion as "vote bank politics," accusing Thackeray of betraying his father's legacy for "appeasement." Thackeray fired back, questioning Shah's moral authority and demanding answers on BJP ministers' own controversial stances.

The Context (How We Got Here)

This dispute is merely the latest chapter in an 11-year ideological divorce. Since the Shiv Sena broke its 35-year alliance with the BJP in 2019 over the Chief Minister's chair, the two parties have been locked in a struggle to define "true Hindutva." While Shah has systematically portrayed Thackeray as a "fake Hindu" for aligning with the Congress, Thackeray has positioned himself as the guardian of an inclusive, regional Hindutva distinct from the BJP's centralized version. The current impeachment row has become a proxy war for this larger battle, with both leaders using the judiciary as a stage to signal ideological purity to their bases ahead of the next election cycle.

The Key Players (Who & So What)

• Amit Shah (Union Home Minister): The prosecutor. By framing the impeachment as an attack on the judiciary for "vote bank" reasons, he aims to consolidate the Hindu vote in Maharashtra, portraying the opposition as anti-Hindu obstructionists.
• Uddhav Thackeray (Shiv Sena UBT Chief): The defender. Cornered by the BJP's electoral dominance, his aggressive counterattack—referencing Kiren Rijiju's beef comments and Jay Shah's cricket decisions—is an attempt to expose hypocrisy in the BJP's Hindutva narrative.
• Justice GR Swaminathan: The symbol. His judicial order has transcended law to become a political football, illustrating how even local religious disputes are now nationalized in India's polarized environment.

The BIGSTORY Reframe

While headlines focus on the "impeachment," the deeper story is the "Institutional Vacuum." Maharashtra has gone over 15 months without a Leader of Opposition, despite the Sena (UBT) having the numbers. This erosion of parliamentary norms mirrors the politicization of the judiciary seen in the current row. The real crisis isn't just about who is the "better Hindu"; it's about the systematic dismantling of the checks and balances—like a functioning opposition and an apolitical judiciary—that sustain democracy. Shah and Thackeray are fighting for power in a system where the rules of engagement are rapidly disappearing.

The Implications (Why This Changes Things)

If the impeachment motion gains traction, it sets a precedent for using parliamentary tools to punish judicial decisions, threatening judicial independence. For Maharashtra, this escalation solidifies the state's political polarization. The "middle ground" has vanished; voters are now forced to choose between two competing, incompatible versions of Hindutva nationalism. Expect this rhetoric to dominate the upcoming local body polls, turning every municipal issue into an ideological referendum.

The Closing Question (Now, Think About This)

If both sides claim to defend the faith, who is left to defend the Constitution?

FAQs

Why did Amit Shah and Uddhav Thackeray clash over judicial impeachment? The clash centered on an opposition motion to impeach Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madras High Court over a controversial order regarding lamp lighting near a dargah. Shah termed the move "vote bank politics" and "appeasement," while Thackeray supported the motion and attacked Shah's own record on Hindutva.

What is the Karthigai Deepam lamp lighting controversy? Justice Swaminathan issued an order permitting the lighting of a lamp (Karthigai Deepam) at a sacred site located near a dargah in Tamil Nadu. The opposition argued this order was biased and could incite communal tension, leading to the call for his impeachment.

Is it right to impeach a judge for a religious order? Impeachment is a constitutional tool reserved for "proven misbehavior or incapacity." Whether a judicial order on religious practices constitutes "misbehavior" is a matter of legal and political debate. Critics argue it politicizes the judiciary, while supporters say it holds judges accountable for bias.

Why doesn't Maharashtra have a Leader of Opposition? Despite the Shiv Sena (UBT) being the largest opposition party, the position has remained vacant for over 15 months. The ruling coalition has delayed the appointment, a move Thackeray alleges is unconstitutional and driven by fear of scrutiny.

Sources

News Coverage

• India Today – Amit Shah vs Uddhav Thackeray over impeachment motion against judge
• Lokshahi – Uddhav Thackeray's sharp counterattack on Amit Shah and Devendra Fadnavis
• NDTV – Ego clash of the titans: Amit Shah vs Uddhav Thackeray
• Mid-Day – Maharashtra state govt does not want LoP in legislature out of fear

Research & Analysis

• NDTV – Fear of Sonia Gandhi: Amit Shah targets Uddhav Thackeray over Ayodhya event