Prince Of Bhavnagar Jaiveerraj Singh Feels Sorry For Rahul Gandhi. Here's Why

New Delhi: Stressing that he feels “very sad” for Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Prince Of Bhavnagar Jaiveerraj Singh recently told news agency IANS that it was rather pitiful to see “a person whose father and mother had been Prime Ministers of the country, destroy such an old party”. Gohil, a popular figure in Gujarat who is also a role model for the youths in the state, expressed his disappointment over Rahul Gandhi’s remarks suggesting the kings and maharajas as ‘land grabbers' and ‘looters’ of public wealth.

In a scathing criticism of the Congress party’s own ‘Yuvraj’, the Prince Of Bhavnagar asserted that Rahul Gandhi makes baseless statements much while forgetting about his own party and its legacy.

“I pray that his mother not only keeps him happy, but would also contribute in enlightening him,” Singh said in a visible satire, days after Rahul’s statements on kings and Maharajas of India, at a recent public rally in Karnataka, created a huge controversy, with several people from the community unleashing wrath against the Congress leader for insulting the legacy of Rajputs.

For the uninitiated, Rahul Gandhi had, during a recent campaign rally in Karnataka, said, “…It was the rule of Kings and Maharajas, they could do whatever they wanted, if they wanted someone’s land they would grab it", even as he tried to paint a rosy picture of the sinking ship the the Congress is, suggesting that it was his party and its workers who, along with the people of the country, were key players in the country gaining Independence and becoming a democracy.

“It was his grandmother [Indira Gandhi] who brought land ceiling law, resulting in loss of ownership of land for many citizens,” Jaiveerraj Singh told IANS, as he went on to question the biased laws brought in by the then Congress government at the Centre.

“A lot of our people lost their lands because of such biased legislation, who is responsible for that?” he quipped.

Under the Land Ceiling Act, five members of the community were treated as a unit and they had rights to own a certain area of land, the surplus of which would be taken away by the government.

The law was brought to limit the size of landholdings by landlords and its redistribution among the wider population.