AAP Protests in Lucknow Over Manikarnika Ghat Row; Police Detain Activists Amid Escalating Tensions
AAP workers staged a high-voltage protest in Lucknow against the alleged demolition at Varanasi’s Manikarnika Ghat, leading to a swift police crackdown. The demonstration, which highlighted the growing political friction over heritage sites in Uttar Pradesh, ended with several activists being detained and relocated by the authorities.
The core of the AAP’s grievance lies in the ongoing redevelopment work at Manikarnika Ghat, which they allege involves unnecessary vandalism and the disregard of local sentiments. Carrying banners and chanting slogans against the state government, the workers demanded an immediate halt to what they termed as the "desecration" of one of India’s most revered sites. The party leadership emphasized that their movement was a defense of Varanasi’s cultural and spiritual heritage, accusing the local administration of prioritizing optics over the sanctity of the cremation ground.
The police response was swift and calculated. Citing a lack of prior permission for the gathering and the potential for a breach of peace, security personnel cordoned off the protest area. When the demonstrators refused to disperse voluntarily, the police initiated a containment operation, lifting several key activists and placing them into waiting buses. While the AAP workers maintained that their demonstration was entirely peaceful and within their democratic rights, the police asserted that the measures were necessary to prevent traffic disruptions and ensure the safety of the general public in the high-security zone.
This incident underscores the deepening rift between the Aam Aadmi Party and the Uttar Pradesh administration regarding urban development projects in sensitive religious hubs. By bringing the Varanasi issue to the capital’s doorstep, the AAP has signaled its intent to challenge the state government’s narrative on heritage management. As the detained workers were relocated to a different part of the city, the event left behind a trail of unanswered questions regarding the balance between modern infrastructure needs and the preservation of historical landmarks, a debate that continues to resonate across the state’s political spectrum.

Comment List