BJP trying to politicise Nusrat Jahan's marriage issue, alleges TMC's Kunal Ghosh

Kolkata (West Bengal) [India], June 22 : West Bengal TMC General Secretary Kunal Ghosh on Tuesday alleged that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been trying to politicise the issue of actor-turned-politician Nusrat Jahan's marriage.
"BJP is trying to politicise the personal matter of Nusrat Jahan. This is her personal family matter. If we start looking into the personal lives of others, it can be problematic for many people belonging to many parties," Ghosh told mediapersons here.
"Nusrat Jahan officially informed the Lok Sabha Secretariat and other departments concerned two weeks back that her marriage annulment proceedings are in court," sources close to the TMC MP told ANI on Tuesday.
The controversy over Jahan's "contradictory" remarks concerning her marital status has refused to die down with BJP MP Sanghmitra Maurya writing to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla demanding that the matter be referred to the Ethics Committee for detailed "investigation for her illegal and ethical conduct" and appropriate action should be taken against her.
"TMC MP Nusrat Jahan in her bio (in Lok Sabha) mentioned that she is married and her husband's name is Nikhil Jain. She took oath as Nusrat Jahan Ruhi Jain. Now she is saying that her marriage is invalid. I made an appeal to Speaker to take an action," said BJP MP Sanghmitra Maurya.
Maurya described her membership of the House as "non-est".
In her letter to the Speaker on June 19, Sanghmitra Maurya, who is BJP MP from Badaun in Uttar Pradesh, attached the Lok Sabha profile of the Trinamool Congress MP where she has mentioned her husband's name as Nikhil Jain.
"An appropriate action be intimated under relevant rules of Lok Sabha procedure and/ or the matter be referred to Committee on Ethics for detailed investigation for her illegal and ethical conduct," Maurya said in the letter.
"Her media statement regarding her marital status controvert her oath for Lok Sabha membership wherein she took oath as Nusrat Jahan Ruhi Jain. This effectively renders her membership as non- est in law," the letter added.
Maurya's letter said Jahan in her oath ceremony on June 25, 2019 pronounced her name as Nusrat Jahan Ruhi Jain and was also dressed as a newly-wed person.
Speaking to ANI, Maurya said Jahan is entitled to her personal life and nobody should encroach upon it but her recent media statement about her marriage means "she deliberately provided false information in parliament".
"She deliberately provided false information to Lok Sabha Secretariat thereby indulging in unethical, illegal and immoral conduct. She cheated her electorate by giving false information and this brings bad name to parliament and its members," Maurya alleged.
West Bengal BJP vice president Jay Prakash Majumdar had earlier this month accused Jahan of making "contradictory" remarks pertaining to her marital status and said the law should take its own course.
"This is a huge contradiction. She is a member of parliament. She is a lawmaker and she is not obeying the provisions. The law should take its own course. Even in parliament, she said that her marital status is 'married'," Majumdar had said.
He had referred to Nusrat Jahan's remarks about her separation from businessman Nikhil Jain, in which she said the question of divorce does not arise as the "ceremony" was never valid under Indian law.
Majumdar said the MP is now saying she is not married.
Nusrat Jahan had said in the statement that getting married in a foreign land (Turkey), as per Turkish Marriage Regulation, her marriage is invalid in India.
"Since it was an inter-faith marriage, it requires validation under Special Marriage Act in India, which did not happen. As per the court of law, it is not a marriage, but a relationship or a live-in relationship. Thus, the question of divorce does not arise," she said.
The Basirhat MP also said the alleged marriage is not legal, valid, and tenable and thus, was not a marriage at all in the eyes of the law.
The actor-turned-politician went on to say that her visit to any place, for business or for the purpose of leisure, should not concern anyone from whom she has separated. All her expenses have always been borne by her contrary to claims by "someone", she said.