The dust has barely settled on the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections, but the political drama in the state is far from over. On December 10, 2025, a flurry of legal, political, and procedural challenges erupted, putting the legitimacy of the results and the broader electoral process under a harsh spotlight. From Patna High Court to the Lok Sabha, voices across the spectrum are locked in a heated debate over the conduct, outcome, and future of elections in Bihar—and perhaps in India itself.
At the epicenter of this storm are a series of election petitions filed by the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Hindustani Awam Morcha-Secular (HAM-S), and the Rashtriya Lok Janshakti Party (RLJP). According to The Times of India, these parties have challenged the results in several key constituencies, including Narpatganj, Madhubani, Mohiuddin Nagar, and Tekari. In Narpatganj, RJD candidate Manish Yadav has formally questioned the victory of BJP MLA Devyanti Yadav. Justice Shashi Bhushan Prasad Singh has already issued a notice to the newly elected MLA, seeking her response. Similar legal challenges are unfolding in other constituencies, with the court demanding explanations from the victorious candidates. All these petitions, filed through advocate Avnish Kumar, signal the beginning of what could be a prolonged and contentious legal battle over the assembly results.
This legal maneuvering comes on the heels of a broader political reckoning. Political commentator Sanjay Kumar, writing for LinkedIn, offered a sobering analysis of the election results. He argued that the ruling Janata Dal (United)-National Democratic Alliance (JDU–NDA) coalition retained power not due to a resounding mandate, but because the opposition failed to present a credible alternative. "The opposition parties like Congress and the Left were too weak to challenge the NDA effectively," Kumar noted. He further observed that the RJD continues to be haunted by the legacy of the so-called 'jungle raj'—a term synonymous with Lalu Prasad Yadav's rule—making it difficult for the party to regain voter trust. According to Kumar, issues like economic development and labor migration, while pressing, do not yet drive electoral behavior in Bihar; instead, entrenched caste loyalties continue to dominate the political landscape.
Adding another layer to the debate, Prashant Kishor—the much-discussed poll strategist and founder of Jan Suraaj—announced via PTI that he would not contest the 2025 Bihar elections. Instead, he said, he would focus on strengthening his party's organizational structure. Kishor predicted a certain defeat for the ruling NDA, citing what he described as "complete chaos" in the coalition's seat-sharing arrangements and ongoing disputes within the INDIA bloc. He asserted, "The NDA is definitely on its way out and Nitish Kumar will not return as chief minister." Yet, the actual results told a different story, with the NDA managing to retain power—albeit amid fierce criticism and skepticism from multiple quarters.
In the wake of these developments, Samajwadi Party National President Akhilesh Yadav weighed in with a pointed critique. As reported by NDTV, Akhilesh, who campaigned in Bihar, expressed surprise at the Grand Alliance's defeat, stating, "UP is not Bihar," and emphasizing that the political dynamics in Uttar Pradesh are distinct from those in Bihar. He questioned the credibility of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), citing malfunctions observed at several polling stations, and went so far as to declare that "EVMs will have to be removed one day" in favor of ballot papers. Akhilesh also alleged that Rs. 10,000 was distributed to voters during the elections, influencing the results, and criticized the BJP for narrative manipulation, including the use of songs and AI-generated videos. He praised Prashant Kishor for attempting to introduce a new political agenda but maintained that the Samajwadi Party would not fall for the BJP's tactics as it prepares for the upcoming Uttar Pradesh elections.
The controversy over EVMs and calls for a return to paper ballots found a fierce opponent in senior BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad. Speaking in the Lok Sabha during a debate on election reforms, Prasad argued that reverting to paper ballots would mean "going back to the days of booth capturing." According to ETV Bharat, he cited at least two dozen Supreme Court and high court judgments validating the use of EVMs and recalled that the Election Commission had previously invited parties to hack the machines in its presence—an invitation that went unanswered. Prasad also pointed out that after the Bihar elections, not a single plea was received to check the EVM micro-controllers, and mandatory verification of VVPAT slips at randomly selected polling stations revealed no discrepancies. "EVMs have made elections faster and safer," Prasad asserted, adding that their use has been validated through five parliamentary polls since 2004.
Prasad did not stop there. He criticized the Congress for making allegations of vote theft before the Bihar elections but failing to file any formal complaints once the results were announced. He also defended the now-scrapped electoral bonds scheme as a step toward cleaning up electoral funding, noting that regional parties had benefited as well. In a pointed jab at the opposition, Prasad urged them to "stop blaming the EC out of your frustration... strengthen your organization... but don't worry... we are going to rule for another 15-20 years... on the back of our work."
Meanwhile, the debate on electoral reforms in the Lok Sabha turned combative. Congress MP Manish Tewari called for sweeping changes, including a 100% count of VVPAT slips, a ban on direct cash transfers ahead of polls, and a reconstitution of the panel that selects Election Commission members to include the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. Tewari argued, "It was expected of the EC that it would work as a neutral umpire, but regretfully I have to say that many members sitting on this side (pointing to opposition benches) and many people feel the need to raise questions over its neutrality." Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee joined in, labeling the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls as arbitrary and warning that deletion of voters would undermine the democratic process.
Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal countered these criticisms, stating that SIR exercises have been held since 1952 and are necessary to clean up electoral rolls due to migration and urbanization. He accused Congress of engaging in vote theft since the first Lok Sabha elections, turning the tables on the opposition's accusations.
As the legal challenges proceed in Patna High Court and the debate over electoral reforms rages in Parliament, one thing is clear: the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections have reignited old questions about trust, transparency, and the future of Indian democracy. With every party staking its claim to legitimacy—and with the courts now drawn into the fray—the battle over Bihar's mandate is far from finished.
