Was it a political faux pas, a reckless gamble—or sheer arrogance? Whatever the answer, Karnataka Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar has every reason to regret his decision to re-induct B. Nagendra into his Cabinet. The minister’s resignation on August 28, barely 25 days after being brought back into government, has turned what Shivakumar projected as a confident political decision into an embarrassing retreat for the Congress.
The irony is impossible to miss. Nagendra had already resigned from the Siddaramaiah Cabinet in June 2024 amid allegations surrounding the Maharshi Valmiki Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation case. Yet, after Shivakumar became Chief Minister, the same Nagendra was brought back into the Cabinet on August 3, 2026. Shivakumar defended the decision, relying on a state SIT report that he said found no direct evidence against Nagendra. He even challenged the Opposition’s criticism by pointing to cases against political leaders and arguing that allegations alone should not disqualify someone from public office.
That argument might have sounded politically clever inside the Congress camp. Outside it, however, it looked like arrogance.
For the question was never merely whether Nagendra had been convicted. The question was whether a Chief Minister claiming to uphold probity and clean governance should voluntarily place a minister under the shadow of a major corruption investigation when central agencies were still pursuing the matter.
And the timing could hardly have been worse.
The CBI had sought the Governor’s sanction to prosecute Nagendra in connection with the alleged ₹90-crore Valmiki Corporation scam just days before his resignation. The ED too had investigated the alleged diversion of funds. The CBI chargesheet filed in June 2026 reportedly named Nagendra along with several other accused. These remain allegations subject to judicial determination—but they were hardly trivial allegations that a government could dismiss with a political shrug.
This is where Shivakumar’s political judgment comes under the scanner.
Why take such a huge risk?
Was Nagendra’s political utility so important that the Congress leadership was prepared to ignore the optics? Was the party more concerned about retaining a politically influential ST leader in the Ballari region than about maintaining its credibility on corruption? Or, as the Opposition will inevitably argue, was there a larger political calculation involving those who have historically helped finance the party and its electoral machinery?
The last question is particularly damaging—not because allegations should be treated as proof, but because Congress has now handed the BJP a ready-made political weapon. If the party wants to convince voters that its governments are uncompromising on corruption, it cannot simultaneously appear selective about who gets political protection.
The BJP and JD(S) understood the vulnerability perfectly. They turned Nagendra’s re-induction into a rallying cry and announced a 170-km padayatra from Raichur to Ballari beginning September 1. They also repeatedly disrupted the legislature demanding his removal.
And now, before the Opposition could even complete its march, Nagendra has walked out.
That is not a victory for Shivakumar. It is a political humiliation.
Worse, it exposes the Congress high command to an uncomfortable question: why was a minister who had already resigned once over the same controversy considered fit for re-induction when the investigative cloud had not disappeared?
Nagendra may claim that he is being targeted because he is a tribal leader, and he is entitled to defend himself. But identity cannot become a substitute for accountability. Nor can a state SIT report be conveniently elevated above continuing investigations by central agencies whenever it suits the government.
Shivakumar’s famous political instinct appears to have deserted him on this occasion. He picked a fight he did not need to pick, defended a decision he could not sustain and eventually watched the minister resign to “avoid embarrassment” to the party.
The BJP could not have asked for a better political gift.
Congress has not merely lost a minister. It has lost the moral high ground on corruption, strengthened the Opposition’s narrative and provided the BJP-JD(S) combine with ammunition for the next electoral battle.
The real embarrassment, therefore, is not Nagendra’s resignation.
It is why Shivakumar re-inducted him in the first place.
That is the question Congress cannot dodge with another political counterattack.
