Agartala: Jan 04: In response to Opposition Leader Jitendra Choudhury’s recent remarks, Congress MLA Birjit Sinha strongly criticized his statements regarding the 2023 Assembly elections. Jitendra Choudhury had claimed that Birjit would not have won without the alliance between Congress and CPI(M) and the support of CPI(M) workers. However, Birjit Sinha firmly disagreed, stating that he would have won even without the alliance. He emphasized his past victories in Kailashahar, having won six times, five of which were against CPI(M) candidates, including former ministers and prominent party members.
Sinha also recalled that in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, when there was no Congress-CPI(M) alliance, Kailashahar was the only constituency in Tripura where the Congress candidate led by around 2,000 votes. He attributed this to the public’s support for Congress, regardless of the alliance. He further criticized Jitendra Choudhury for his arrogance and alleged that Choudhury had insulted former Chief Minister Manik Sarkar during a party event in Kailashahar on December 17, causing many party workers to leave before the speech.
Sinha also pointed out Choudhury’s defeat in the 2023 elections, where he contested in a non-reserved seat and barely won by 200 to 250 votes. Sinha accused Choudhury of harshly criticizing Tripura Motha leader Pradyot Kishore, and suggested that had the Motha fielded a candidate in the seat, Choudhury would have faced a massive defeat.
Sinha criticized the CPI(M)’s declining influence, claiming that the party had lost its grassroots support, evident from its inability to field candidates in many panchayat elections. He also refuted Choudhury’s claim that the Congress performed well in panchayat elections due to CPI(M)’s help, highlighting that CPI(M) failed to contest in 99% of Kailashahar’s panchayat seats and several of its own MLAs couldn’t submit nominations.
Lastly, Sinha addressed the issue of CPI(M)’s declining credibility, stating that despite their claims, they no longer hold significant influence in the state.
