When the Mahagathbandhan lost the recent Bihar assembly elections, the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, led by Asaduddin Owaisi, was cited as one of the key reasons for the defeat. The AIMIM contested 25 seats, mainly in the Seemanchal region, won five and was said to have contributed to the loss in 24 seats for the Mahagathbandhan. It was an almost exact replay of 2020, when Owaisi’s candidates won five seats in Seemanchal and polled enough votes in adjoining constituencies to influence the defeat of the Mahagathbandhan.
The AIMIM seems to have hurt the prospects of INDIA bloc parties earlier as well, in Maharashtra, West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh. In Maharashtra, the party was blamed for the loss of the Congress–NCP alliance in urban and semi urban Muslim belts in the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Its strength in Aurangabad, Malegaon and parts of Mumbai created three-way contests that helped the National Democratic Alliance. Even in 2024, when the AIMIM won only one seat, it fragmented opposition votes in several constituencies once considered safe.
The pattern is clear. The AIMIM does not need many victories to influence outcomes. It only needs to target constituencies where margins are narrow and minority vote consolidation is vital. The BJP often ends up benefiting indirectly, which gives credence to the Congress claim that Owaisi cuts into its votes and is, at times, the BJP’s B team. Yet this claim does not hold in Telangana, where the Congress openly courts Owaisi.
A clear example is the recent Jubilee Hills assembly byelection. The Congress depended on the AIMIM’s cadre mobilisation, which helped its candidate V. Naveen Yadav win with a margin of nearly 25,000 votes. Unlike in 2023, the AIMIM did not field a candidate. Instead, Owaisi campaigned with Yadav and the AIMIM’s booth level teams mobilised votes in Shaikpet, Jubilee Hills and Film Nagar—areas with a strong Muslim presence. In contrast, Mohammad Azharuddin lost Jubilee Hills in 2023 on a Congress ticket largely because the AIMIM was in the fray.
The AIMIM’s present behaviour is rooted in its past, says Aminul Hasab Jafri, a three-time legislative council member of the party. He traces its origins to 1958 when Owaisi’s grandfather Abdul Wahid revived the AIMIM and faced suppression from chief minister Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, who jailed him in 1962 and pressured him to disband the party. Once Reddy realised the AIMIM’s ability to counter communist influence in Hyderabad, he made peace. Owaisi’s father Salahuddin won Patharghatti the same year and the communists lost their hold on Hyderabad by 1967. This history shaped the AIMIM’s pragmatism, which is a willingness to work with larger parties without surrendering autonomy.
As the AIMIM expanded its network, successive ruling parties courted it because its sphere of influence is the state capital itself. Why would the party antagonise any ruling or opposition party? Jafri says the AIMIM never surrenders to any larger political force even as other political parties either try to pick on it or refuse to acknowledge it. This pattern has repeated. Although the Congress made peace with the AIMIM after 1962, it fielded home minister Ahmed Ali Khan against Salahuddin in the Charminar constituency in 1967, but lost. AIMIM leaders were jailed during the Indo-Pak wars. The Telugu Desam Party government under N.T. Rama Rao continued the antagonism. In the 1986 Hyderabad municipal corporation elections, Rama Rao tried to defeat the AIMIM by deploying all his MLAs in the Old City. But the AIMIM became the single largest party with 38 seats and took charge of the administration with Congress support.
The AIMIM continued with cooperation or opposition depending on how it was treated by other parties. It was part of the United Progressive Alliance but later distanced itself after differences with N. Kiran Kumar Reddy, the last chief minister of undivided Andhra Pradesh. After the Telangana Rashtra Samithi—now BRS—came to power in 2014, Owaisi extended his party’s support for two terms. Congress leader A. Revanth Reddy took a strong stand against the AIMIM before the 2023 assembly elections. But he called for a truce once he became chief minister, although the AIMIM had supported the BRS in the elections, which led to the Congress losing all 24 seats in the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation region. This possibly pushed Revanth Reddy to work with the AIMIM. Later, the Congress supported the AIMIM’s nominee for the legislative council elections under the Hyderabad local bodies quota in March this year, and in turn, Owaisi ensured the Congress candidate’s victory in Jubilee Hills, the party’s first assembly seat in the GHMC area.
The Jubilee Hills victory could help the Congress improve its chances in the coming GHMC urban body elections, which may take place in the first half of 2026. The Congress believes that winning back the GHMC from the BRS would be seen as a validation of Revanth Reddy’s governance model. A stable friendship with the AIMIM may make this possible. Even if the Congress falls short of a majority, the AIMIM’s support could help it take control of the GHMC. Yet the Congress is cautious about acknowledging its cooperation with the AIMIM. The party’s chief spokesperson for Telangana, Sama Rammohan Reddy, says the cooperation in the Jubilee Hills bypoll is a one-off event and that it happened mainly because of Naveen Yadav’s earlier affiliation with the AIMIM and his closeness to Owaisi.
Afroz Alam, who teaches political science at the Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad, says the AIMIM’s politics is no different from other parties in the secular fold. He says Owaisi has always tried to maintain peace with the Congress and other secular parties. In Maharashtra, the Congress allied with the Shiv Sena but refused to go with the AIMIM. In Bihar, the RJD and the Congress declined the AIMIM’s offer. After the last elections, AIMIM MLAs defected to the RJD. This time, Owaisi seems to have preempted them by announcing support for the Nitish Kumar government.
The AIMIM has had a fluctuating relationship with other parties since its inception, yet it has always played its hand skilfully. Its success can be credited to Owaisi, its president since 2008. When he took over, the party was confined to pockets of Hyderabad’s Old City. Over the past decade and a half, he has rebuilt it into a recognisable political force that influences elections in several states and shapes national debates far beyond its numerical strength. This transformation has come through organisational rebuilding, careful expansion strategies, ideological positioning and the cultivation of new supporters.
Owaisi’s first step was to consolidate the party’s home base. Before expanding elsewhere, he modernised neighbourhood committees in Hyderabad, strengthened its youth and student wings and built a volunteer corps capable of booth level mobilisation. Along with these structures, the AIMIM expanded a welfare network, including educational trusts, clinics, medical camps, flood relief teams and legal assistance groups, embedding the party deeply in local communities. This welfare system, along with longstanding ties with masjid committees, traders and neighbourhood leaders, provided a stable foundation on which Owaisi built his political project.
Although this organisational revival was limited to Hyderabad, Owaisi’s rise as a national figure came from his ability to articulate issues that mainstream parties often approach cautiously. With the Congress retreating from direct Muslim representation and the BJP consolidating majoritarian politics, Owaisi became one of the few leaders who speaks clearly on minority rights, citizenship laws, communal tensions and constitutional protections. His speeches circulate widely on social media and resonate with younger Muslim voters who feel underrepresented in national politics. This visibility created a symbolic leadership that the AIMIM has been using.
Yet, Owaisi has not attempted expansion everywhere. Instead, he has adopted a cluster-based strategy, identifying Muslim pockets where opposition parties are weak. Alam says the AIMIM has identified well populated Muslim areas facing underdevelopment and worked strongly in those regions. Its success in Maharashtra and Bihar is not a fluke. The party has a strong presence and Owaisi’s messaging on discrimination has wide appeal among youth. This model guided the AIMIM’s entry into Seemanchal in Bihar, Aurangabad, Malegaon and Bhiwandi in Maharashtra, parts of Murshidabad in West Bengal and select seats in Uttar Pradesh. The party contested only a few seats but selected them with care, focusing on constituencies where a three-way split could alter outcomes or where a strong local candidate could build a durable base.
Underlying this expansion is a change in Muslim political sentiment, particularly among youth. With rising communal tensions and reduced political visibility, many young Muslims seek leaders who speak directly about their concerns. Owaisi provides a mix of assertive representation and identity based politics that allows the party to gain footholds even in states where it lacks a large organisation. He himself delivers most political messaging. His speeches in Parliament and outside are direct and clear and, according to Alam, have made him an acceptable leader.
Although the AIMIM’s electoral successes remain limited to certain clusters, its strategic influence extends further. By strengthening local foundations, constructing a national identity, targeting strategic constituencies and cultivating new leadership, Owaisi has transformed the AIMIM from an Old City outfit into a party with regional presence and national relevance.