The BJP in Bihar served a show cause notice to party MLC Sachidanand Rai for repeatedly making anti-party and anti-NDA comments in the past few days.
In the notice, state BJP disciplinary action committee chairman Amarendra Pratap Singh asked the Member of Legislative Council to explain within 10 days as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for making statements which were against the party and the alliance that is running the government in the state.
Rai, who has been critical of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, had questioned the "intentions" of Kumar after a letter issued by the special branch of police asking details about RSS and its affiliated bodies surfaced in the social media.
"Our party must be careful of the intentions of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar who holds the home portfolio. We should note the timing of the letter," he had said.
"It was around the same time when he had thrown a tantrum and refused to join Narendra Modi government at the Centre despite contesting the Lok Sabha polls as an NDA ally," Rai had said.
Seeking to know the nature of relationship between the BJP and its ally JD(U) of which Kumar is the president, Rai reportedly said Kumar was only interested in remaining the CM irrespective of which alliance he is part of.
The show cause said, "You have been repeatedly making statements which are personal in nature. These remarks have appeared in newspapers and clearly against the officially stated political stand of the BJP. Your statements continued despite the leadership clearly telling you about its official position."
Rai and some other BJP legislators had taken the May 28 letter issued by special branch of police seeking details of functionaries of the RSS and other Sangh Parivar organisations seriously after it went viral on social media.
Confirming the veracity of the letter, a top police official said the exercise was carried out in view of intelligence inputs of threat to lives of RSS functionaries in the state, though the manner in which the circular was drafted was "objectionable" and an explanation had been sought from the officer concerned.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content