In the days following the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections, a political storm has erupted over the state government’s ambitious Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana, a scheme designed to empower women entrepreneurs with direct cash transfers. What was intended as a catalyst for women’s economic independence has instead become the center of a heated controversy, as it emerged that funds meant exclusively for women were erroneously credited to the accounts of several men in Darbhanga district. The fallout has seen recovery notices, public protests, and accusations of vote-buying, all of which have cast a shadow over one of Bihar’s most high-profile welfare initiatives.
The Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana, launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi via videoconference from Delhi in September 2025, aimed to provide financial assistance to one woman from each family in Bihar, granting ₹10,000 as an initial installment to start a business of her choice. According to The Hindu, the scheme was introduced just ahead of the November state Assembly elections and was widely seen as a strategic move to bolster the National Democratic Alliance’s (NDA) prospects. Indeed, the NDA went on to secure 202 out of 243 Assembly seats, with the scheme credited as a game changer for the ruling coalition.
By December, the Nitish Kumar-led government had transferred funds to over 1.56 crore women across the state, totaling ₹7,500 crore, with the promise of an additional grant of up to ₹2 lakh for those who demonstrated successful entrepreneurship. Yet, as the dust settled after the polls, it became clear that not all the money had reached its intended recipients. Notices began arriving at the homes of men in Ahiyari village under Jale block, Darbhanga district, demanding the return of ₹10,000 that, as officials now admitted, had been mistakenly transferred to their bank accounts due to technical glitches.
“I am not aware how money was credited to my account. I am a disabled person and unable to return the amount as I purchased goats and ducks with the money. I would request Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and officials concerned to forgive me and waive off the money,” said Nagendra Ram, one of the recipients, speaking to reporters as quoted by The New Indian Express. He was not alone in his predicament. Baliram Sahni, another beneficiary, explained to The Hindu that he had spent the funds on Chhath Puja festivities and daily necessities for his family. “How can the government expect us to return the money? We are poor people and struggle to meet our daily needs,” he said, adding that his wife, Sunaina Devi, had not received any benefit from the scheme.
The notices, issued by the Bihar Rural Livelihoods Promotion Society (BRLPS), known locally as JEEViKA, cited technical issues as the cause for the erroneous transfers and requested recipients to return the money to a designated account. The Block Project Manager in Jale, Devdutt, wrote in a letter dated December 5, 2025, “You are requested to submit the money receipt after deposit of the amount in the bank account of BRLPS.” But for many of the men who received the money, the request seemed not only unfair but also impossible to fulfill.
The controversy quickly escalated into a political battle. On December 13, the Opposition Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) took to social media, sharing screenshots of the recovery notices and alleging that the cash transfers were a “frantic rush” to buy votes ahead of the elections. The RJD demanded a thorough probe, claiming that funds had been deliberately distributed to men in order to influence the outcome at the ballot box. According to Times of India, Mukesh Sahani, chief of the Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP), went so far as to allege, “At least 80% of the money was distributed fraudulently among the people to get votes. It was also given to men. But now the government is asking the villagers to return the money.” He added, “If the government is asking for the money back, it should also return the votes it received from the villagers and order fresh elections in the state.”
State Rural Development Minister Shravan Kumar responded by ordering an immediate investigation into the matter. “I have asked the officials to submit a detailed report of such transfers, if any, to me at the earliest,” he told The New Indian Express on December 17. A special team was formed to look into the complaints, though officials urged patience until the probe was complete. “The investigation is under way and it would not be prudent to make any official comment at this stage,” a senior department official stated.
For the men caught in the crossfire, the situation is fraught with anxiety and frustration. Some, like Ram Sagar Kumar, questioned the timing of the government’s actions. “Amit Shahji [Union Home Minister] repeatedly said at every rally that the money given under the scheme will not be taken back. If there was any mistake at all, why didn’t the government send the notice earlier? Why wait till the election got over?” he asked, as reported by The Hindu. Others, including those who never applied for the scheme, expressed confusion about why they were targeted for repayment. “I voted for Nitish Kumarji assuming that the money was given for personal use. It was transferred to my bank account though I had not applied for the scheme. I cannot work as I am physically challenged. Else, I would have found work and returned the money. I spent it on daily needs,” said Nagendra Ram.
The scheme’s original intent—to empower women and stimulate entrepreneurship—has been overshadowed by these administrative hiccups and political recriminations. Yet the broader social context cannot be ignored. For many in Bihar’s rural heartland, government cash transfers are often the difference between subsistence and deprivation, especially during festival seasons like Chhath Puja or Deepavali, when expenses rise and incomes are stretched thin. The expectation, whether justified or not, that such transfers are pre-election gifts is deeply rooted in the region’s political culture.
Opposition parties continue to press for accountability, demanding that the government not only rectify the errors but also ensure that the full promised sum of ₹2 lakh is distributed to women entrepreneurs as originally pledged. VIP chief Mukesh Sahani has threatened protests if this commitment is not honored, accusing the state of “demanding the money back from the poor.” Meanwhile, the government maintains that the investigation will clarify the extent of the error and determine a fair path forward, ideally without imposing undue hardship on the affected families.
As the probe continues, the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana stands at a crossroads—its future as a flagship empowerment scheme now inextricably linked to the outcome of this controversy. For the thousands of families in Darbhanga and beyond, the resolution will mean far more than a bureaucratic correction; it will signal whether the state’s promises of empowerment are truly meant to last beyond election day.
