BJP National Secretary Anupam Hazra, who threatened that he would hug West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee if he tests positive for COVID-19, has now confirmed to have contracted to the viral infection, days after he invited controversy by issuing a threat.
Anupam Hazra is a native of West Bengal and he was recently appointed as the BJP National Secretary and earlier this Sunday, a day after becoming the national secretary, he had caught with massive flak and controversy after he said that he would hug Mamata Banerjee if he got infected by the pandemic.
According to reports, he has tested positive for the COVID-19 viral infection on Thursday night. He had complained of uneasiness after which his samples were collected for COVID-19 testing and the sample returned positive, confirming that he had got infected by the pandemic. He has been admitted and getting treated at a private hospital in Kolkata.
Hazra had on last Sunday attended the party meeting in Baruipur during which he said he would hug Mamata Banerjee to make her feel the pain of the families of COVID-19 patients. While addressing in the event, Hazra stated that the workers of the BJP in the state are fighting a bigger enemy than Corona. They are fighting Mamata Banerjee and the workers are able to fight Mamata Banerjee without a mask, they think they can also fight against COVID-19 without wearing a mask.
After his remarks had stirred controversy, the Trinamool Congress party (TMC) has filed a police complaint against Hazra for his remarks of hugging the Chief Minister. Senior TMC leader Saugato Roy had condemned the remarks and that the comment reflects the mindset of the Central ruling party. The TMC's unit in Siliguri, West Bengal had held a rally against Hazra and filed a police complaint against the BJP national secretary.
Hazra was the former MP from TMC and last year, he quitted Mamata's faction and joined BJP. The police complaint has been filed against him at the Siliguri police station in Darjeeling district under the grounds that Hazra had maligned a public figure, who is a woman, in violation of the constitution and hurting the sentiments.
Comments