Quota Minister Ajit Pawar Quits Fadnavis Cabinet After Court Issues Arrest Warrant in Old Case

The Maharashtra government witnessed political turbulence after a minister resigned from the cabinet following an arrest warrant issued by a court. The development came amid mounting pressure on the ruling coalition. The minister had already lost departmental responsibilities earlier. Legal trouble escalated rapidly. Questions were raised over propriety. Critics intensified attacks. The resignation finally came late. It marked a decisive moment for the government. Accountability moved to the centre of debate.

What Triggered The Court Action?

A sessions court upheld a magistrate court verdict in a nearly three-decade-old housing case. The court confirmed a two-year sentence. It also issued an arrest warrant. The warrant followed the rejection of relief. The legal process reached a critical stage. Authorities sought compliance. The ruling made the minister’s continuation untenable. The case revived memories of past allegations. Judicial scrutiny tightened significantly.

How Did Government Respond Initially?

After the arrest warrant, the government withdrew all portfolios from the minister. The move was ordered by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis. Administrative charge was shifted to the deputy chief minister. However the minister remained in the cabinet. This decision drew criticism. Opposition questioned moral authority. Civil society groups raised concerns. Pressure kept building steadily.

What Role Did Ajit Pawar Play?

The resignation letter was sent to Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar, who also heads the Ajit Pawar faction of the NCP. Ajit Pawar forwarded it to the chief minister. This formal step ended speculation. It signalled coalition coordination. Political observers noted timing. The move aimed to contain damage. It sought to protect the government’s image.

What Is The Case About?

The case dates back to the mid 1990s. It involved alleged misuse of housing benefits meant for the economically weaker section. The court found the accused guilty. A two-year sentence was imposed. The verdict stood after appeal. The warrant followed procedural steps. The case became a test of political ethics. Legal consequences finally caught up. Public attention returned sharply.

Why Was Cabinet Presence Questioned?

Despite losing departments the minister remained in the cabinet. This sparked sharp criticism. Opposition parties targeted the government. They alleged double standards. The issue dominated political discourse. Questions arose about credibility. Governance optics suffered. The delay in resignation hurt perception. Analysts said decisive action was overdue. The episode strained coalition messaging.

What Happens Next Politically?

With the resignation the focus shifts to legislative consequences. The minister’s assembly membership may now face scrutiny. Legal processes will decide future steps. For the government the episode is a warning. Coalition partners will tread carefully. Leadership has promised clean governance. The case underscores judicial independence. It also highlights accountability pressures. Maharashtra politics enters another sensitive phase.