Bihar has turned into 'crime capital of India', says Rahul Gandhi
Addressing the 'Samvidhan Suraksha Sammelan' in Nalanda's Rajgir, Gandhi also took a jibe at Prime Minister Narendra Modi for "remaining silent" on US President Donald Trump's claims of brokering peace between India and Pakistan during the military conflict.
"Bihar, once considered the land of peace and justice, has now turned into the crime capital of India," the former Congress president asserted.
Gandhi also said he was apprehensive whether the Centre could properly conduct the caste census with no officers from the OBC, Dalit or tribal communities finalising the questionnaire.
"The Modi government will never conduct a real caste census, because the day they conduct a real caste census, their politics will end. There are two models of caste census - a BJP model and the Telangana model. In the BJP model, officers will decide the questions in a closed room. No officers from the OBC, Dalit or tribal communities are there in the select group of officers", said Rahul Gandhi.
Telangana is ruled by the Congress.
"I am fighting for the caste census to save the Constitution and for the overall betterment of the country...Wherever we form government in future, we will remove the 50 per cent cap on reservations. It will start from Bihar," he said.
"The PM used to say in every speech: 'I belong to OBC'. Then on the caste census, they say that there is no caste in India," Gandhi said.
The Congress leader wondered how Narendra Modi became an OBC if there is no caste in the country.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
21 minutes ago
- The Wire
In Bihar's Politics, a Fair Place at the Table Continues to Elude Muslims
Politics Despite Muslims constituting almost 17% of Bihar's population, their voices in legislatures remain disproportionately limited. In Bihar, politics often comes down to numbers and for Muslim candidates, those numbers can be brutally defining. Time and again, elections have shown a clear pattern: Muslim leaders are less likely to win from constituencies where their community doesn't form a significant chunk of the population. It often doesn't matter which party backs them or how experienced they are; if the local Muslim population is too small, their chances at the ballot box tend to drop. Despite Muslims constituting nearly 17% of the state's population, Muslim voices in the legislature are disproportionately limited by geography and demographics. It's not merely about election arithmetic; it's a commentary on where identity and representation meet in Bihar's highly caste and community-oriented politics. The data's message is stark: in Bihar, being a Muslim candidate means that your election may not hinge as much on what you believe in, but on who else around you looks like you do. In this article, we take a closer look at six recent elections in Bihar, three parliamentary (2014, 2019 and 2024) and three assembly (2010, 2015 and 2020), to better understand how Muslim representation has played out at the ballot box. By looking at these two sets of elections, this article aims to uncover patterns in candidate selection, constituency demographics and the win rates of Muslim candidates over the past decade and half. From 2014 to 2024: a narrowing path to parliament for Muslims The 2014 parliamentary election was a difficult terrain for Muslim candidates in Bihar. Most candidates that won had contested from constituencies with a large Muslim population. The Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) fielded six Muslim candidates, three in constituencies with a 20% to 30% Muslim population and two in constituencies with a less than 20% Muslim population, but only one – the party's candidate for the Araria constituency – won; that seat has a Muslim population of over 40%. The Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)) put up five Muslim candidates across different regions, none of whom managed to win. The Congress (INC) through Mohammad Asrarul Haque won one seat, Kishanganj, where Muslims make up around 68% of the population (and from where one of the JD(U)'s Muslim candidates lost). Tariq Anwar of the Nationalist Congress Party won from Katihar, where Muslims make up 41% of the population, and Mehboob Ali Kaiser of the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) won in Khagaria (with a just ~11% Muslim population), a rare case where he was able get support from the Dalit community as well – a community that also supported the BJP as the LJP was in alliance with it. The BJP's lone Muslim candidate Shahnawaz Hussain didn't manage to win from Bhagalpur, where Muslims form less than 20% of the seat's population. Overall, the results suggested that Muslim candidates could only win in a constituency where Muslims make up a large share of voters (Table 1). The 2019 election saw a decline in Muslim candidates winning seats. The RJD fielded five Muslim candidates, including in Muslim-majority seats like Araria, and lost all. The INC again held on to Kishanganj, with Mohammad Jawed winning from the same. However, their candidate in Katihar lost. Once again, the LJP's candidate in Khagaria won from a constituency with a low Muslim population share, repeating the exception seen in 2014. These results highlighted a deeper problem: Muslim candidates were not able to win in constituencies where they once had better chances. Without the support of other communities, especially Yadavs and Dalits, their chances had become even slimmer (Table 2). By 2024, the space for Muslim candidates had shrunk further. Only five were fielded by major parties: two by the RJD, one by the JD(U) and two by the INC. The RJD's candidates both failed to win. The INC, however, won both its seats: Kishanganj and Katihar. This underlined that it is still difficult for Muslims to achieve adequate representation. Their success now depends almost entirely on contesting from seats with large Muslim populations, and even then, only with backing from other communities like Yadavs and Dalits. Muslim representation remains limited to a few pockets where demographics and political alliances align just right. Overall, if we observe the eight Muslim candidates who won across the three elections, six of them were elected from constituencies where the Muslim population was over 40%. This clearly shows a strong correlation between a high Muslim population and the winnability of Muslim candidates (Table 3). 2010 to 2020: a decade of fluctuating fortunes for Muslims in the Bihar assembly In the last three assembly elections in Bihar, the success of Muslim candidates has dramatically fluctuated, depending on shifting alliances and party strategies, as well as the evolving political identity of Muslim voters. In 2010, the RJD fielded the highest number of Muslim candidates at 30. Its win rate in this aspect stood at just 20%. The INC performed even worse, with only three of its 49 Muslim candidates winning, thus clocking a dismal 6.12% win rate. The three seats the party won were Kishanganj, Kasba and Bahadurganj, all of which have a Muslim population of over 40%. The JD(U) emerged as an exception in this election, with a strong 50% win rate, largely due to its ability to garner support from across communities, even in areas with a low Muslim population. But the larger pattern in 2010 was clear: Muslim candidates were otherwise more likely to win from seats with high Muslim populations (Table 4). The 2015 election, however, brought a major shift. The formation of the Mahagathbandhan between the RJD, JD(U) and INC changed the game for Muslim candidates, who won 24 seats. The RJD's win rate surged to 75%, with 12 wins out of 16 constituencies, including many from seats where Muslims weren't even the predominant group. The JD(U) followed with a 71.42% win rate, while the INC also improved, winning six out of ten seats. This success was not merely a result of demographics; it reflected the fact that people averse to the NDA may have felt like they didn't have a choice but to vote for a Mahagathbandhan candidate (as their number of choices would have gone down with alliance parties fielding one candidate per seat), whether they were Muslim or otherwise. It also highlighted the fact that if Muslims receive support from other communities, they may make it to the assembly. The 2015 election proved that when social coalitions align, Muslim political representation can thrive, even in areas where they aren't numerically predominant (Table 5). By 2020, that momentum had fractured. The Mahagathbandhan weakened, and the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM)'s emergence in Seemanchal added a new layer of competition for Muslim votes. Nineteen Muslims were able to win in this election. The RJD's performance slipped, with just eight of its 18 Muslim candidates winning – a 44.44% win rate. The INC's win rate declined drastically to 36.36% and the JD(U), once a model of cross-community support, failed to send a single Muslim candidate to the assembly, largely due to two factors: first, its being an ally of the BJP, and second, in the recent past the JD(U) didn't seem to stand up for the Muslim community on the national and state level. The AIMIM secured five wins out of 15 in its debut assembly election in Bihar, but only in Muslim-majority constituencies, highlighting both its rise and its limits. The 2020 results revealed a scattered field where Muslim votes were divided and Muslim candidates increasingly reliant on narrow, community-driven strategies rather than broad-based alliances (Table 6). This pattern in which Muslim candidates often win from seats with a large Muslim population raises a troubling question. Why is it that Muslim voters often vote along ideological lines, but non-Muslim voters seem to prefer sticking to caste lines when the candidate is Muslim? According to the CSDS-Lokniti post-poll survey of 2020, 76% of Muslims voted for the Mahagathbandhan, irrespective of caste and region. Yet when a Muslim candidate stands, many from the Mahagathbandhan's own base often keep their votes firmly within caste and religious borders. Transferability, the supposed lifeblood of coalition politics, seems to get stuck in traffic whenever a Muslim candidate appears on the ballot. The irony is rich: the most ideologically loyal voters get the least electoral reward. Perhaps parties in Bihar should hold a crash course on coalition basics, or at least invest in stronger vote transfer engines. Because if secular parties don't seriously rethink Muslim representation soon, they may find their minority plank strong in theory, but minority MLAs missing from the seats that count. For years, Muslims in Bihar have voted with hope in their hearts, not for their own caste or narrow interests. Muslims stood by the promises of secularism, cast their vote for alliances and not identity. But when it's time for tickets or seats, they're too often left behind, told quietly that the numbers don't favour them. Their loyalty is rarely doubted, yet they are rarely rewarded by secular parties. Muslims aren't asking for privilege, they are asking just for a fair place at the table. And if their voice keeps getting ignored, the silence they leave behind may one day speak volumes. Aamir Shakil is a political researcher based in Delhi. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Telangana guv sends 42% BC quota ordinance to President
Hyderabad: Telangana governor Jishnu Dev Varma has sent the Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Ordinance to the President of India for a decision. The ordinance — aimed at enabling 42% reservations for Backward Classes (BCs) in local bodies in Telangana — was submitted by the Congress govt on July 14 and officially forwarded by the Raj Bhavan on Tuesday. The timing is crucial. With the high court mandating local body elections be held by Sept 30, the President's response will determine whether the state can proceed with its plan to raise the BC quota — a move that challenges the Supreme Court's 50% reservation ceiling. The ordinance, along with two earlier bills seeking 42% BC quota in education, employment, and local bodies, now hangs in the balance. If the 42% reservation for BCs is cleared by the President, total reservation in the state could reach 77% with 15% for SCs, 10% for STs and another 10% for the economically weaker sections. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad At the heart of the issue is section 285A of the Telangana Panchayat Raj Act, 2018, which stipulates reservation norms for village panchayats, mandal parishads, and zilla parishads. As per Supreme Court guidelines, total reservations for SCs, STs, and BCs in local bodies cannot exceed 50%. Under the previous BRS regime, had elections been held, BC reservations would have remained capped at around 22–23%. To address this, the Congress-led govt conducted a comprehensive caste census and, based on empirical data, proposed increasing BC reservations to 42%. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Writing in English Doesn't Have to Feel Hard Grammarly Learn More Undo This led to the formulation of the Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Ordinance, which sought to remove the 50% cap in local body reservations. Governor's rationale Sources indicate that the governor's decision to escalate the matter to the President stemmed from two main concerns: The state's attempt to override the 50% reservation ceiling — a threshold reaffirmed by various Supreme Court rulings — through legislative amendments and legal ambiguity over whether a state govt possesses the authority to unilaterally remove this cap without prior central approval. Given these concerns — and with the two BC reservation bills already awaiting Presidential assent — the governor chose to refer the ordinance to the President for further examination, sources said. Legal precedent The move also invokes the landmark 1992 Indra Sawhney versus Union of India judgment, in which the Supreme Court ruled that reservations exceeding 50% are permissible only under "extraordinary circumstances" with robust, data-backed justification. The Telangana govt, citing such exceptional grounds, amended section 285A to base reservations on findings from its caste census. However, the ordinance now awaits Presidential review before it can be implemented. The delay in local body elections has already had tangible consequences. In compliance with the high court's orders, the govt aimed to finalise reservations by July 25 and then announce the election schedule. However, the absence of elected bodies has stalled governance at the grassroots level. Development works in villages have come to a grinding halt, and crucial Finance Commission funds — amounting to over ₹1,600 crore — remain frozen, as these can only be released to duly constituted local bodies. The term of existing local governing institutions expired over 18 months ago, resulting in a vacuum of leadership — no sarpanches, mandal parishad territorial constituency members, or zilla parishad territorial constituency members are in place. Cong plans next moves To push for the Centre's assent, the Congress govt has drawn up an action plan. A series of political programmes are scheduled to be held in Delhi between Aug 5 and 7. The state plans to wait until Aug 15 for a response from the Centre. If there is no progress, the govt is contemplating holding the elections with 42% BC reservations regardless of the pending assent, sources said.
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
SIR disrupts Parliament; JP Nadda calls it double standards
JP Nadda NEW DELHIl Parliament proceedings were disrupted on Thursday as opposition parties protested the revision of Bihar's electoral rolls, while in RS, leader of the House JP Nadda accused them of displaying "double standards" by walking out when home minister Amit Shah started replying to the debate on Operation Sindoor on Wednesday, insisting that a reply come from PM Modi. Nadda cited a precedent from the Congress-led UPA government era, when a discussion on the home ministry's statement on the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks was replied to by the then PM and home minister in LS, and then by the home minister in RS. LoP in RS Mallikarjun Kharge, however, later clarified that the opposition had not walked out against Shah's replying to the debate but to protest his remark "main akela hi apko nipat lunga (I can handle you myself)". "We said PM is here, please call him to the House...," he said. Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju underlined that the PM replied to the debate in LS for 1.42 hours on Tuesday and said the govt has collective responsibility and the opposition doesn't get to decide who will speak. Nadda sought to remind the opposition that the Chair had made it clear during a BAC meeting and in RS that it's the govt's prerogative to decide which minister should speak and reply.
