Maulana Sajid Rashidi: What happened to the Maulana who commented on Dimple Yadav? l Dimple Yadav

A political and religious storm has erupted in India following a recent controversy involving prominent leaders from the Samajwadi Party, including party president Akhilesh Yadav and his wife, Member of Parliament Dimple Yadav. The issue began when the couple, along with several party leaders, held a meeting inside a mosque—an event that quickly became the center of intense public scrutiny, not only for the political implications but also for the religious and cultural sensitivities surrounding the visit.

The incident gained traction on social media and in mainstream news outlets, sparking debates across television studios and political circles. Much of the focus, however, turned sharply toward Dimple Yadav’s attire and posture during the mosque meeting. A number of Islamic clerics and religious leaders voiced their displeasure, arguing that her way of sitting inside the mosque was inconsistent with Islamic norms. While such criticism might have remained within the bounds of ideological disagreement, it took a controversial and deeply offensive turn when Maulana Sajid Rashidi, President of the All India Imam Association, made highly derogatory remarks about Dimple Yadav during a televised debate.

Maulana Rashidi’s remarks were widely condemned across political lines, particularly by members of the Samajwadi Party. His comments, which many labeled as misogynistic and disrespectful, targeted not only Dimple Yadav’s conduct but also included personal and religiously charged attacks on her character. Although Maulana Rashidi later attempted to justify his statements and issued multiple clarifications, the damage had been done. His words triggered an avalanche of backlash, not just from Samajwadi Party supporters, but from civil society members and women’s rights activists as well.

The situation escalated when a video surfaced showing Maulana Sajid Rashidi being physically assaulted during a live television program in a studio setting. The footage, which quickly went viral across social media platforms, shows a man approaching the cleric mid-discussion and slapping him multiple times before being pulled away. According to initial reports, the individual involved in the assault was identified as Mohit Nagar, district president of the Samajwadi Chhatra Sabha (student wing) in Gautam Buddh Nagar, along with other party leaders such as Shyam Singh and Prashant Bhati.

The incident is believed to have taken place in a Noida-based news studio and was allegedly recorded by Samajwadi Party workers themselves. The video shows multiple people standing around as the attack unfolds, with some of them appearing stunned, while others react slowly to intervene. The brazen nature of the assault has reignited debates around political violence, religious intolerance, and the growing culture of vigilantism, particularly in high-stakes political environments.

In response to the attack, Maulana Rashidi filed a police complaint at Sector 126 police station in Noida. The FIR names those involved and seeks legal action against the perpetrators. Meanwhile, the controversy surrounding his earlier remarks continues to draw political fire. The Samajwadi Party’s women’s wing, along with several party workers, organized protests condemning Maulana Rashidi’s statements and demanding an official apology. In Lucknow, an FIR was also registered against the Maulana at the Vibhuti Khand police station, initiated by Samajwadi Party leaders and activists.

In a surprising twist, the Samajwadi Chhatra Sabha leaders who were involved in the physical altercation have turned the tables, accusing Maulana Rashidi of inciting religious hatred and communal tension. They claim that his comments were not only personally offensive but also inflammatory enough to disturb public order. They argue that his statements were made with the intent to provoke division and demean women in politics under the guise of religious orthodoxy.

Police officials have confirmed that an investigation is underway to determine the sequence of events, identify all those involved, and decide on appropriate legal actions. According to law enforcement sources, both the assault and the controversial remarks are being treated as serious offenses. Authorities are examining the viral video, eyewitness testimonies, and other evidence to piece together the full scope of the incident.

Meanwhile, Maulana Sajid Rashidi has continued to defend his position in the media, stating that his objection was purely religious and not personal. In his own words, he argued that Dimple Yadav’s way of sitting inside the mosque violated Islamic traditions. He pointed to her posture, contrasting it with another woman in the same photo—whom he claimed was sitting respectfully according to Islamic expectations. Rashidi argued that Dimple Yadav, being a public figure, should have been more aware of the sanctity of the space.

He further questioned the presence of Akhilesh Yadav and his political associates inside the mosque, calling it a misuse of religious space for political gain. According to Rashidi, such a gathering is against Islamic values, especially when political discussions take precedence over spiritual practices. In his extended commentary, he even mocked a fellow cleric who was also present in the mosque, accusing him of compromising religious dignity for political affiliation.

His sharpest remarks, however, were directed at Akhilesh Yadav. He accused the former Chief Minister of exploiting religious spaces for political theater and claimed that his actions were staged to demonstrate influence and power. Rashidi alleged that the mosque meeting was a strategic move to show that Akhilesh Yadav could command the presence of both religious figures and political allies simultaneously. According to him, such displays undermine the sanctity of religious institutions and mislead the public about the intentions of political leaders.

While Rashidi’s explanation may resonate with a small segment of conservative religious followers, the broader public and political community have largely rejected his approach. Many critics argue that he crossed the line from religious commentary to character assassination, especially when speaking about a woman lawmaker. The situation has ignited a wider conversation around gender, religion, and the place of women in political and religious life in India.

This incident also sheds light on the increasingly blurred lines between religious authority and political activism. India, a secular democracy, has long struggled with the challenge of maintaining a balance between religious sensitivities and democratic freedoms. In this case, that delicate balance appears to have been severely disrupted, with inflammatory rhetoric and violent reactions creating a toxic atmosphere of hostility.

As the investigation continues, both Maulana Rashidi and the Samajwadi Party leaders involved in the assault await legal consequences. The incident stands as a stark reminder of how easily political discourse can spiral into personal attacks, social division, and even physical violence when mutual respect is abandoned. It also raises critical questions about the role of religious leaders in public life and the limits of free speech in a pluralistic society.

In the days ahead, the focus will likely remain on the police investigation, public reactions, and possible legal proceedings. Political observers are watching closely to see how the Samajwadi Party handles the fallout from both the mosque meeting and the subsequent assault. For now, the episode serves as an alarming case study of how religion, politics, and personal animosity can collide in the most volatile ways—and how, in the absence of measured discourse, even a single comment can ignite a firestorm.

Play video :
https://youtu.be/8E8WFfk3zF0?si=8R4j6ZfimnVs-n1T