Bihar Elections 2025: In the heart of India’s political battlefield, where promises of reform echo louder in every election season, the number tells a harsher truth and a different picture altogether. Despite years of judicial cautions and political outrage, Bihar’s Phase 1 election map is once again marked by candidates facing criminal charges. They are not a few but nearly one in three.
As per the latest data released by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) and Bihar Election Watch, 32% of candidates contesting in the first phase of the Bihar Assembly Elections 2025 have declared criminal cases against themselves. ADR data displays that all major political parties have continued their old practice of giving tickets to individuals with criminal charges. The range is between 20% and 100% across parties. The Supreme Court, in its February 13, 2020, directive, had mandated that political parties must give justification on why candidates with criminal records were picked over those without, based on merit and qualifications.
1. Anant Singh-JD (U), Mokama: Famous for his long criminal record, he is contesting from Mokama on a Janta Dal (United ) ticket. The JD(U) candidate’s affidavit reveals 28 criminal cases against him.
2. Raju Kumar Singh, Sahebganj – BJP’s candidate ha more than 10 cases including Arms Act and alleged murder/shooting of a woman architect in Delhi.
3. Osma Shahab- RJD, Siwan: He is the son of the late strongman Mohammad Shahabuddin, and is contesting from Siwan on the RJD ticket. He has declared five criminal cases.
4. Ritlal Rai-RJD, Danapur: Another heavyweight candidate of RJD, contesting from Danapur has 30 pending cases against him, including murder, criminal intimidation and extortion.
5. Karanveer Singh, RJD, Barh: From Barh constituency, the RJD nominee faces 15 criminal charges.
6. Amarendra Kumar Paney-JD (U), Kuchaykot- Representing Janata Dal (United) from Kuchaykot, Amarendra Kumar Pandey has 14 pending criminal cases.
The ADRs data shows that the top 10 crorepati candidates collectively hold assets worth nearly Rs 900 crore. Leading the list is Kumar Pranay (BJP, Munger) with declared assets over Rs 170 crore, followed by Raj Kishore Gupta (Independent, Maharajganj) with Rs 137 crore and Anant Singh (JD-U, Mokama) with Rs 100 crore.
Top crorepatis candidates in Bihar Phase 1 election:
As per the ADR, the top 10 wealthiest candidates contesting in Phase 1 are:
- Kumar Pranay (BJP, Munger) – Rs170 crore+
- Raj Kishor Gupta (Independent, Maharajganj) – Rs137 crore+
- Anant Singh (JD-U, Mokama) – Rs 100 crore+
- Dr. Kumar Puspanjay (JD-U, Barbigha) – Rs 94 crore+
- Arun Kumar (RJD, Tarapur) – Rs 83 crore+
- Sandip Kumar Singh alias Gopal Sandeep Singh (Jan Suraaj Party, Maner) – Rs 80 crore+
- Deo Kumar Chaurasia (RJD, Hajipur) – Rs 68 crore+
- Rajeev Ranjan (Independent, Jagdishpur) – Rs 63 crore+
- Arun Kumar Gupta (RJD, Barharia) – Rs 54 crore+
- Sanjay Kumar Singh (LJP-Ram Vilas, Simri Bakhtiyarpur) – Rs 45 crore+
As per an Indian Express report, most political parties have used similar explanations when asked why they fielded candidates facing criminal charges.
🏛️ Criminal Cases Among Party Candidates
Analysis of candidates with criminal charges across major Indian political parties
📊 Key Insights
76%
Highest Rate: RJD leads with the highest percentage of candidates facing criminal cases
20%
Lowest Rate: BSP has the lowest percentage of candidates with criminal cases
3.8x
Variation: Nearly 4x difference between parties with highest and lowest rates
For instance, the JD (U) described its Mokama candidate, Anant Singh, who has more than 50 pending cases, as a ‘’philanthropist with a huge fan following.’’ Likewise, Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj party, which promised clean politics, justified that all 34 of its tainted nominees by calling them ‘’good social workers’’ picked on ‘’people’s demand.’’
The RJD, as per the report, called several of its candidates ‘’very active and popular’’ whereas the BJP has dismissed cases against its nominees as ‘’baseless.’’ The Congress, which is fighting on 61 seats, underlined that its candidates as ‘’experienced’’ and committed to party ideals.
ADR says that such uniform reasons directly contradict the Supreme Court’s February 134, 2020 ruling, which required it to provide detailed and specific justification for nominating candidates with criminal backgrounds.
