Explained : Personality Cult in Indian Politics 2026: Why Leaders Remain Untouchable and Its Impact

Dear Reader,

BJP MP Nishikant Dubey’s remarks last week about Biju Patnaik being the “link” between Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the CIA during the 1962 Sino-Indian War, raised tempers in Odisha.

The BJP, wary that the controversy would damage it in a State that it first won on its own only in 2024, quickly went into damage-control mode. Senior BJP leaders from Odisha issued statements praising Biju Patnaik, while the Biju Janata Dal (BJD) condemned the BJP for insulting the legacy of a man known to his followers as “Biju Baba”, “Utkal Keshari” (Pride of Odisha), and “Bhoomi Putra”.

Biju Patnaik, who is popularly called the “Architect of Modern Odisha”, the “Tall Man of Odisha”, and the “Eagle of the Storm”, was a colossal figure who dominated the State’s politics for four decades, although he served as Chief Minister for two separate terms: 1961 to 1963, and 1990 to 1995. His son Naveen took over in 2000 and ruled until 2024.

Aware that Dubey’s remarks could give the BJD an issue to galvanise its workers, who have been numbed into shock by their defeat in the last Assembly election, the BJP used its State leaders, who are mainly imports from the BJD, to disassociate itself from Dubey’s comment. Baijayant Panda went so far as to say that “Biju uncle” was “one of the greatest patriots of modern Bharat” and that casting aspersions on his patriotism was “fantastical and patently ludicrous”. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, too, was roped in. In his Utkal Divas message, he hailed Biju Patnaik for his commitment to nation-building.

But, condemning the “disrespectful” remarks, BJD MP Sasmit Patra resigned from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and IT headed by Dubey, and the BJD staged a walkout from the Rajya Sabha.

Biju is too revered in Odisha to be taken lightly. In 2008, the BJD demanded a Bharat Ratna for Biju , while in 2016 the Odisha Assembly passed a resolution seeking the same. He was reportedly the only Indian whose coffin was draped in the national flags of India, Indonesia, and Russia.

Realising he was in hot water, Dubey issued a statement on April 1 saying: “Biju Babu has always been and will remain a towering statesman for us. If my statement has hurt anyone’s sentiments, I unconditionally apologise. First of all, this statement is my personal view. My thoughts on Nehru ji were misconstrued as being about Biju Babu.”

The BJP is shrewd enough to know that it can fight Biju’s son Naveen in an election but it cannot survive in Odisha if it slights the legacy of a figure revered as a symbol of Odia pride.

The episode is a reminder that even in these times of polarised politics, a handful of politicians still command respect across party lines, and opposition parties are wary of targeting them.

I saw this first-hand during my coverage of the Bihar Assembly election in November 2025, widely billed by the JD(U) as Nitish Kumar’s last electoral battle.

After an initial offensive against him—when barbs like “Paltu Ram” were hurled, his physical and mental health was questioned, and there was speculation about whether he would last the term—the RJD stepped back. Its leaders toned down the rhetoric and began telling voters that the BJP would ease Nitish out after the election, with some even floating the possibility of a post-election tie-up with the man. The earlier attacks had, in other words, begun to yield diminishing returns.

Another leader who command supports across party lines is Sharad Pawar, as seen during the recent Rajya Sabha election from Maharashtra. All three constituents of the Maha Vikas Aghadi—the Shiv Sena (UBT), the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar faction), and the Congress—initially staked a claim to the lone MVA seat. But despite initial objections from Aaditya Thackeray, the alliance unanimously backed Pawar. His election was uncontested even by the BJP. That Pawar has friends across parties is no secret, even if his cross-party appeal is of a different kind from Biju Patnaik’s legacy.

When, in 2017, Prime Minister Modi targeted former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the Rajya Sabha, saying “Dr Sahab is the only person who knows the art of bathing in a bathroom with a raincoat on”—a reference to Singh’s clean personal image amid the UPA-era corruption scandals—many in political circles felt the attack brought the BJP little benefit. Singh himself refused to comment. The entire Opposition closed ranks.

So too with Atal Bihari Vajpayee, whom the opposition long described as “the right man in the wrong party”. Jawaharlal Nehru famously predicted in the 1950s that the young Vajpayee would one day become Prime Minister. Later, in the 1980s, Rajiv Gandhi facilitated Vajpayee’s medical treatment for a kidney ailment by including him in an official government delegation to the US.

Targeting such individuals is, in the competitive electoral arithmetic of today’s India, akin to targeting a community—every vote counts.

Bal Thackeray, who has become a symbol of Marathi pride, is another personality the Opposition has always been reluctant to target directly, more so after his death. When Eknath Shinde parted ways from the Uddhav Thackeray faction of the Shiv Sena, he made a point to assert that the senior Thackeray had never compromised his principles.

Even former NCP leader Chhagan Bhujbal—who was once keen to arrest Thackeray, according to former Anti-Terrorism Squad chief K.P. Raghuvanshi’s memoir Troubleshooter—was defensive enough about the episode to publicly clarify that he had ensured the police did not oppose Thackeray’s bail and offered Matoshree, the Thackeray residence, as a temporary detention facility. Being seen as aggressively anti-Thackeray carries electoral costs.

Similarly, Congress leader Sushilkumar Shinde wrote in his memoir, Five Decades in Politics, that while he could not justify Thackeray’s politics or the methods he used, he had cordial relations with the Sena chief.

Farmers have such an emotional connect with former Prime Minister Chaudhary Charan Singh that even four decades after his death, politicians across parties refrain from attacking him, although his son Ajit Singh and grandson Jayant Singh attract regular barbs. The Modi government conferred the Bharat Ratna on Charan Singh months before the 2024 Lok Sabha election, and later entered an alliance with his party in western Uttar Pradesh.

“Tau” Devi Lal of Haryana was another such figure, known for personal relationships that cut across party lines. His “pagri watt bhai” (brothers by the exchange of turbans) bond with Shiromani Akali Dal leader Parkash Singh Badal helped ease the frequently strained relations between Haryana and Punjab.

As much as one might rebel against personality politics, people with charisma always matter in politics. Almost every party swears by B.R. Ambedkar, Kanshi Ram, and Karpoori Thakur, while all non-Congress parties want to be seen as heirs of Jayaprakash Narayan. And, of course, everyone wants to own Mahatma Gandhi, even though the BJP’s foot soldiers throw vitriol at the Mahatma and hold mock shootings of his effigy.

Dubey’s quick retreat and apology confirm that even in an era of muscular political messaging, some legacies are simply not worth the fight.

Write in with your thoughts on the personality cult in Indian politics.

Until the next newsletter.

Anand Mishra, Political Editor, Frontline

We hope you have been enjoying our newsletters featuring a selection of articles that we believe will be of interest to a cross-section of our readers. Tell us if you like what you read. And also, what you don’t like! Mail us at frontline@thehindu.co.in