India’s political sparring spilled into the Jeffrey Epstein controversy on Wednesday. Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri rejected claims raised by opposition leader Rahul Gandhi in the Lok Sabha that sought to link him to the “Epstein files”. Puri said his contact with Epstein was limited, professional, and unrelated to the crimes associated with the late American financier.
Epstein files Puri claims ignite a Parliament flashpoint
Rahul Gandhi told the Lok Sabha that Puri’s name appears in records linked to Epstein, pressing the government over who in public life had connections to the financier’s circle.
The remarks immediately triggered a rebuttal from Puri, who called the insinuations baseless and said they misrepresent what the documents show.
Puri says meetings were limited to a professional setting
At a press conference, Puri said he met Epstein only “three or four times” while working with the International Peace Institute in New York. He described the meetings as part of a delegation and said they took place in a formal, work-related context.
Puri also referenced the IPI’s then leadership, saying the institute’s head at the time, Terje Rød-Larsen, knew Epstein. He insisted his own interactions did not extend beyond official engagement linked to international policy work.
What Puri says the released documents actually contain
Puri said the relevant material is already public because U.S. authorities have released a large set of documents connected to Epstein. He claimed those records include only a small number of references to him across the years covered.
He also referred to email exchanges cited in the debate, arguing they reflect professional discussions rather than anything improper. In one example he highlighted, he said the exchange touched on India’s potential for internet-based economic growth and was copied to Epstein.
When politicians refer to “files” in this context, they usually mean document dumps from investigations and court proceedings, including emails and contact records, not a verified list of criminal associates.
The row unfolds against a grim backdrop
Epstein was indicted on federal sex trafficking charges in August 2019 and died a month later in a New York jail cell, a case that has continued to draw scrutiny of his network and contacts.
That backdrop is what makes any public mention sensitive. Still, being referenced in released emails does not, by itself, establish wrongdoing. Puri’s defence rests on that distinction, while Gandhi’s challenge centres on political accountability and transparency.
The clash adds a new front to the Budget Session sparring. Puri says the record shows only limited, official contact. The opposition argues the government must answer clearly whenever names surface in high-profile releases.