A fresh controversy has erupted in Maharashtra politics after post-poll alliances in two municipal councils triggered renewed accusations that Asaduddin Owaisi’s All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) is functioning as the Bharatiya Janata Party’s unofficial “Team B.” Critics say the developments have turned whispers into conviction that AIMIM’s presence ultimately strengthens the BJP by splitting minority and secular votes, while publicly posturing as its fiercest critic.
The spark came from the December 20 civic poll results, where the BJP stitched together unexpected coalitions to take control of key local bodies. In Ambernath Municipal Council, the BJP aligned with the Congress and the Ajit Pawar faction of the NCP to form the ‘Ambernath Vikas Aghadi.’ With 32 members in a 60-seat house, the alliance sidelined the Shiv Sena, the single-largest party and ensured the election of BJP’s Tejashree Karanjule Patil as council president. The move stunned Sena leaders, who accused the BJP of betraying coalition partners for power.
But it was the Akot Municipal Council in Akola district where the political shockwave truly hit. Here, the BJP joined hands with AIMIM councillors and others to secure control, leading to claims that Owaisi’s party, despite fiery rhetoric, is indirectly enabling BJP dominance. Though AIMIM leadership later claimed defections and internal dissent, the optics told another story; one of proximity rather than opposition. 
For years, political observers have argued that AIMIM’s aggressive identity-based campaigns fragment minority votes, weakening opposition blocs and helping the BJP consolidate its majoritarian base. This latest episode has been cited as fresh “proof.”
The backlash came from all sides. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis publicly condemned the alliances, calling them “unacceptable” and warning of disciplinary action. Shiv Sena leaders accused the BJP of pursuing power at any cost, while Congress suspended its own Ambernath councillors for unauthorized collaboration.
AIMIM’s denials, meanwhile, have done little to ease speculation. Critics argue that whether intentional or incidental, the outcome remains the same, AIMIM’s presence weakens anti-BJP forces, particularly in communally sensitive regions.
The episode has also revived a broader debate over how identity-driven politics fuels polarization. Owaisi’s speeches, often framed as defense of Muslim rights, are cited by detractors as feeding the very ecosystem that sustains BJP’s Hindutva messaging. Opposition parties allege that AIMIM’s role mirrors a “vote-split strategy,” especially in states like Telangana, Bihar and Maharashtra.
Maharashtra’s alliances have further eroded public faith in ideological claims. What voters witnessed instead was a scramble for power wrapped in moral grandstanding.
Whether AIMIM is consciously aligned with the BJP or simply a recurring beneficiary of fractured opposition unity remains contested. But politically, the perception battle may already be lost. For many, the Maharashtra episode has converted suspicion into belief — that Owaisi’s AIMIM may speak the language of resistance, but its political outcomes repeatedly strengthen the very party it claims to oppose.
