YS Jagan and YS Sharmila Reddy 
Andhra Pradesh

Andhra: How Jagan’s family feud has resurfaced amid allegations of poll violence

Former CM Jagan Mohan Reddy had previously refused to let his sister and AP Congress Committee president Sharmila host her daughter’s wedding at the family home in Bengaluru. While he cited security concerns, TDP leaders have accused him of being “destructive” towards his own family.

Written by : TNM Staff

Amidst widespread allegations of violence against YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) workers and candidates during the filing of nominations for the upcoming local body elections in Andhra Pradesh, the ruling Telugu Desam Party (TDP) is attempting to capitalise on a feud between former chief minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy and his sister and AP Congress Committee president YS Sharmila.

Jagan had previously refused to let Sharmila host her daughter’s upcoming wedding at the family’s ‘Yelahanka Palace’ in Bengaluru. He cited security and privacy reasons, as he still lives in the property.

His political opponents quickly declared that his treatment of his sibling was reflective of how he would treat the state as well. TDP leader and Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu said the dispute showed that Jagan had no ‘family values' and that he had failed both as a chief minister and a brother. He even called Jagan “destructive” for denying permission to host his niece’s wedding at the family property. 

“You may ask why I am getting into their family matters. But I say this to show how [Jagan’s] mindset is turning dangerous for the state. He is destructive in both his family life and public life,” Naidu alleged, calling Jagan ‘Kamsa mama’, a mythological tyrant king and uncle of the god Krishna who tried to have his nephew killed.

Naidu’s son Nara Lokesh also levelled similar criticism against Jagan, saying, “Every family has a Mama who blesses his niece at the wedding and does everything possible to make it a memorable occasion. Here, @ysjagan is refusing to let the wedding happen at YSR garu's own family home. If this is how he treats his own sister and niece, the people of Andhra Pradesh already know how he treated our sisters for 5 years.”

The YSRCP alleged the Naidu was “spewing venom at our party president” to divert the public’s attention from questions over the conduct of the elections. 

“The Supreme Court's orders in the legal battle of YSRCP have exposed the atrocities of Chandrababu Naidu in the state. YSRCP president YS Jagan explained these issues to the public through a media conference with comprehensive evidence and evidence. There is a nationwide discussion on the attacks and election irregularities committed against YSRCP candidates in the state without filing nominations,” the party said. They accused Naidu of using the police to prevent YSRCP candidates from filing nominations. “Law and order has collapsed,” the party also alleged. They accused the CM of “degrading himself and making personal criticisms against Sri Jagan.” 

The party released an October 9 letter Jagan wrote to Sharmila with the stated intention of letting the public know the “facts”.

In the letter, Jagan wrote, “Conducting a wedding on the premises that I stay in would pose serious security concerns, and thus the same was conveyed through various people. Please understand that for an event such as a wedding, it would involve a large number of people entering the property, including various service providers, catering staff, flower and decoration teams, event management personnel, videographers and photographers, as well as the guests. With so many people, the majority of whom we don't even know, coming in and out, and videos and photographs of the premises and of the surrounding areas in circulation would pose serious security concerns.”

He added that it was not an easy decision for him to make, as he has watched his niece grow up and wants “nothing but the best for her”. Jagan said that he would take a similar decision even if it involved his own children. “At the end of the day, this is my home, and I want to ensure that me and my family are safe here. I was hurt that despite me conveying the very real privacy and security risks through various people, you still went ahead, ignoring my disapproval and concerns,” the letter said.