Suvendu Adhikari Eats Fish In Temple. BJP Says This Must End Non-Veg Row - NDTV

**Suvendu Adhikari’s Fish Bhog at Kalighat Stirs Religious‑Cultural Debate** On the evening of Kaushiki Amavasya, senior Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Suvendu Adhikari entered the historic Kalighat Temple in Kolkata and partook in a communal meal that included fish. The meal, described as “bhog” and shared with temple priests, was presented as a gesture of devotion during the auspicious occasion. While the practice of offering non‑vegetarian items at some Hindu shrines has historical precedents, the act ignited a fresh controversy, reviving a long‑standing “non‑veg row” that has periodically surfaced in West Bengal’s religious and political discourse.

The controversy quickly escalated when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) issued a statement demanding an end to the practice of serving fish and other non‑vegetarian items in temples, urging the state government to enforce “uniform vegetarian offerings” across all places of worship. The party framed the incident as a violation of traditional sanctity and called for stricter oversight, citing concerns that such practices could alienate devout Hindus who adhere to vegetarian worship. In parallel, a Congress leader was arrested in Kolkata for protesting remarks made by the ascetic Baba Bageshwar, who had earlier criticized the inclusion of fish in temple rituals, adding another layer of political tension to the episode.

Responses from cultural commentators and civil‑society groups have been mixed. The *Indian Express* emphasized that festivals belong to the people and cautioned against “food police,” arguing that imposing a monolithic dietary norm could infringe on regional culinary traditions. Meanwhile, the *Times of India* and *The Hindu* highlighted the broader political backdrop, noting that the BJP’s stance aligns with its national agenda of promoting vegetarianism in religious spaces, while the TMC and other regional parties view the issue as a matter of cultural autonomy. As the debate unfolds, law‑enforcement agencies have so far taken no action against the temple’s practices, leaving the matter to be settled through public discourse and political negotiation.