The 2025 Bihar Assembly elections have left India’s political class and public reeling—not only because of the resounding victory for the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), but because of the swirling controversy over the integrity of the electoral process and the dramatic fallout within key opposition families. As the dust settles, questions about the health of Indian democracy and the future of its political opposition are coming into sharp focus.
On November 14, 2025, the votes were counted after a historic turnout: according to Dainik Bhaskar and other outlets, Phase 1 saw 65% polling for 121 seats, while Phase 2 shattered records with over 67% turnout. The NDA, led by the BJP and Nitish Kumar’s JD(U), emerged with a staggering 202 out of 243 seats, a landslide that few had predicted with such certainty. Exit polls had signaled a strong advantage for the NDA, projecting between 130 and 160 seats, and pegged the RJD-led Mahagathbandhan (MGB) at a distant 70 to 100 seats—well short of a majority. The People’s Pulse exit poll estimated the NDA’s vote share at 46.2%, with the MGB trailing at 37.9%.
This decisive result, however, has been overshadowed by a storm of controversy. According to The Quint, the Election Commission of India (ECI) conducted a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls prior to the election, aimed at removing duplicate, deceased, or shifted voters. While such an exercise is meant to safeguard the integrity of the vote, the timing and scale of deletions have raised eyebrows across the spectrum. In 174 constituencies, the number of voters deleted during SIR exceeded the margin of victory. Among 91 seats that changed hands between 2020 and 2025, 75 were won by the NDA. This pattern, critics argue, cannot be dismissed as mere coincidence.
Specific cases highlight the potential impact. In Kurhani (Muzaffarpur), the BJP won by 9,718 votes, yet more than 24,000 names were deleted. Sandesh (Bhojpur) saw JD(U) scrape through by just 27 votes, against 25,682 deletions. Even in Matihani (Begusarai), where the RJD managed a win by 5,290 votes, 33,700 names were removed from the rolls. The numbers are stark: approximately 6.5 million names were deleted in the SIR process, with the final electoral roll dropping from 78.9 million to 74.2 million after corrections and new registrations.
It is not just the scale, but the geography of these deletions that has fueled allegations of bias. Reports cited by CounterCurrents indicate that the Seemanchal region—a Muslim-majority area and traditional opposition stronghold—saw the highest deletion rate at nearly 7.7%. By contrast, Magadh, Nitish Kumar’s home turf, recorded among the highest numbers of new voter additions. The Kerala unit of Congress alleged that 128 of the NDA’s 202 victories were made possible only by SIR-driven deletions, arguing that genuine, living voters—especially from marginalized and vulnerable communities—were struck off the rolls without proper verification.
To add to the controversy, the ECI’s own dataset revealed not a single illegal immigrant identified, despite SIR’s stated aim of removing non-citizens. Critics have seized on this, suggesting that the exercise was less about cleaning up the rolls and more about a targeted purge to tip the electoral balance. As The Quint pointed out, deletion alone does not prove manipulation—some of those removed may have been duplicates or deceased, and there is no evidence that every deleted person voted in 2020. Still, the magnitude and pattern of the exercise have undermined confidence in the process.
The ECI has defended its actions as “routine and procedural,” insisting that the revision was necessary to maintain the integrity of the rolls. “The revision was necessary to maintain the integrity of the rolls, prune duplicate and ineligible entries, and ensure only valid, current voters remain,” the ECI stated. Yet, for many in Bihar and beyond, the explanation rings hollow when deletions outnumber victory margins in hundreds of battleground constituencies.
The fallout has not been limited to electoral statistics. The RJD, once a formidable force in Bihar, was left with just 25 seats out of 243 despite contesting over 140. The defeat has triggered an emotional and highly public family crisis within the party’s leadership. Rohini Acharya, daughter of RJD patriarch Lalu Prasad Yadav, announced her decision to quit politics and sever ties with her family just a day after the results. Her heartfelt social media posts detailed her feelings of humiliation and suffering at the hands of her family and community. “Yesterday, a daughter, a sister, a married woman, a mother was humiliated, abuses were hurled, shoes were raised to kill her... I didn't compromise on my self-respect, didn't give up on truth... just because of this, I had to face insults,” she wrote.
Rohini accused party leaders Tejashwi Yadav and MP Sanjay Yadav of expelling her from the family, claiming she endured disgrace and physical abuse after questioning the party’s election defeat. “I have no family. You can go and ask this to Sanjay Yadav, Rameez, and Tejashwi Yadav. They are the ones who threw me out of the family,” she said in her first public response. Her departure has thrown the RJD’s internal divisions into the spotlight, compounding the party’s electoral woes.
Union Minister Chirag Paswan weighed in on the matter, expressing empathy for Rohini’s distress and backing her right to speak out. “Political differences are one thing, but she is also my family... When there is tension in any family, I can understand how unsettling it can be... I do not believe that after marriage, the in-laws' home is the only home for a daughter... I do not support this orthodox thinking... Yesterday when she said all this, I could understand that pain and I pray that all this gets resolved soon...,” Paswan told news agency ANI. His comments underscore the emotional toll the election has taken, not just on political fortunes, but on personal relationships at the highest levels of Bihar’s politics.
For many observers, the events in Bihar are a sobering reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions. The possibility that electoral rolls can be engineered to erase dissenting voters, whether by accident or design, poses a structural threat to the principle of universal suffrage. Disenfranchisement, particularly of marginalized communities, erodes trust in the system and sets a dangerous precedent for the rest of the country.
In response, civil society and opposition leaders are calling for sweeping reforms: greater transparency in SIR data, independent oversight of roll revisions, streamlined re-registration for those deleted, strengthened legal recourse, and robust public awareness campaigns. The debate is far from over, and the outcome will shape not just Bihar’s political future, but the very credibility of India’s democracy.
As Bihar’s voters reflect on an election marked by both unprecedented turnout and unprecedented controversy, the questions raised about fairness, representation, and the rule of law are likely to echo far beyond the state’s borders in the years to come.
