Patna, Nov 16, 2025: Union Minister and Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) chief Chirag Paswan on Sunday strongly refuted claims made by the Jan Suraj party regarding the alleged diversion of ₹14,000 crore in World Bank funds for the Bihar Assembly elections. The remarks come in the wake of widespread speculation and criticism following the recent state elections, where the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) secured a decisive mandate.

Jan Suraj, the political party founded and led by election strategist Prashant Kishor, faced a disappointing performance in the 2025 Bihar assembly elections, failing to win even a single seat. Following this setback, the party’s spokesperson Pavan Varma made claims suggesting that the central government allegedly diverted World Bank funds intended for other developmental projects to provide monetary benefits to women voters ahead of the elections. According to Varma, these funds were withdrawn just before the model code of conduct was enforced and were used to distribute ₹10,000 each to 1.25 crore women under the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana.

Speaking to the media, Chirag Paswan rejected these allegations as entirely baseless. “Where do they get this data from? Where do they get this information from?” Paswan questioned, addressing the claims made by Pavan Varma. He labelled them as “empty claims” and challenged the Jan Suraj leadership to present verifiable facts. “If you have any facts, present them, and the government will respond,” Paswan asserted. The union minister’s remarks underscored the NDA’s stance that there was no diversion of World Bank funds for electoral purposes and that the allegations were politically motivated, aimed at undermining the credibility of the recent state government initiative.

The claims made by Jan Suraj revolved around the timing and magnitude of the fund disbursement. According to Varma, Bihar’s public debt currently stands at around ₹4,06,000 crore, with the state incurring daily interest obligations of approximately ₹63 crore. In this context, Varma alleged that ₹14,000 crore, which he claimed was initially earmarked for other purposes, was reallocated to provide direct financial assistance to women voters in the run-up to the elections. He further suggested that rumours were circulating in the state indicating that the remaining amount of the funds would not have been released if the NDA had failed to secure a majority.

The Jan Suraj spokesperson maintained that the withdrawal of such a substantial sum of money, coupled with its alleged use for targeted electoral benefits, raised ethical and legal questions. “Just an hour before the model code of conduct was implemented, ₹14,000 crore were withdrawn and ₹10,000 each was allocated to 1.25 crore women,” Varma said. “As I have said, this is our information. If it is wrong, I seek forgiveness. But if it is true, then the question arises as to how far this is ethical,” he added. The allegations suggested a deliberate attempt to influence voter behavior through large-scale monetary disbursements, which, if proven, could have triggered significant political and legal scrutiny.

However, Chirag Paswan categorically dismissed these claims, arguing that there was no credible evidence to substantiate them. He emphasised that the central government and the Bihar administration had followed all due procedures in implementing the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana, which is a legitimate welfare initiative designed to empower women through financial assistance. “These are government schemes, which are transparently implemented and audited. The allegations of diversion of World Bank funds are unfounded,” Paswan said. He stressed that targeting women voters through welfare programs is part of the government’s ongoing development agenda and not an electoral manipulation tactic.

The Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana, under which 1.25 crore women in Bihar received ₹10,000 each, has been widely acknowledged as a flagship program aimed at improving women’s access to employment, income, and financial independence. The scheme, which provides financial assistance directly to women, is intended to address socio-economic disparities and create opportunities for marginalized communities. It also forms part of the larger framework of state and central government initiatives to boost employment and strengthen women’s participation in the economy.

Paswan further underscored that the Jan Suraj claims appeared to be motivated by political considerations, particularly in light of the party’s electoral performance. The NDA, which won 202 of the 243 assembly seats, including a strong showing from its constituent parties—the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Janata Dal (United)—secured an overwhelming mandate, leaving the opposition scrambling to explain its electoral losses. By raising allegations of fund diversion, Paswan suggested, Jan Suraj aimed to shift the narrative from its own organizational shortcomings to purported malpractices by the ruling alliance.

Political analysts observing the developments in Bihar note that accusations related to the timing of welfare scheme disbursements during elections are not uncommon in Indian politics. Such claims often gain traction immediately following elections, especially when opposition parties experience heavy losses. However, verifying such allegations requires careful scrutiny of financial records, audit reports, and government documentation, none of which have substantiated the claims made by Jan Suraj to date.

Chirag Paswan’s response also emphasized the importance of accountability and transparency in governance. By asking Jan Suraj to produce verifiable evidence, he highlighted the government’s willingness to engage in factual discourse rather than respond to speculative or politically motivated assertions. “If there is any evidence of wrongdoing, the government will take cognizance. Until then, these claims are merely speculative statements aimed at creating confusion,” Paswan stated.

The controversy underscores the broader debate surrounding the use of government welfare schemes during elections, a topic that has been contentious in India. While opposition parties often allege that welfare measures are used as electoral tools, the ruling parties maintain that these programs are part of long-term development goals, implemented according to legal and procedural frameworks. In this case, the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana has been presented as a welfare initiative targeting women’s economic empowerment rather than an election-focused disbursement.

The Bihar Assembly elections also saw record participation from women voters, many of whom benefited from the scheme. The direct transfer of financial assistance, often through digital channels and bank accounts, allows for transparency and auditability. This digital infrastructure makes diversion of funds, as alleged by Jan Suraj, highly improbable, according to government sources.

The incident has drawn attention to the way political parties frame narratives around development schemes and welfare programs during elections. It highlights the challenges in balancing the objectives of welfare provision with perceptions of political neutrality, particularly in a high-stakes electoral environment. The focus on women voters and the scale of the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana has become a focal point of political discourse, with parties interpreting the initiative in line with their electoral strategies and narratives.

As of now, the Jan Suraj claims remain unverified, and no formal investigation has been reported into the alleged diversion of World Bank funds. The central government, through Chirag Paswan’s statement, has reiterated its commitment to transparency, accountability, and adherence to established financial and procedural norms. Officials have reiterated that all disbursements under the scheme are in line with budget allocations, approved projects, and audited financial processes, ensuring that public funds are used for their intended developmental objectives.

The dispute also highlights the importance of responsible political communication, especially in the post-election period. While opposition parties are entitled to question government actions, presenting unverified claims as fact can create confusion among the public and erode trust in institutions. Chirag Paswan’s insistence on evidence-based dialogue underscores the need for political accountability and factual discourse in democratic governance.

In conclusion, the controversy over the alleged diversion of ₹14,000 crore World Bank funds ahead of the Bihar elections illustrates the intersection of welfare programs, electoral politics, and public perception. While Jan Suraj has accused the NDA of unethical practices, Chirag Paswan has firmly rejected these claims, calling them “empty” and urging the presentation of concrete evidence. As the political narrative continues to unfold in Bihar, the debate over welfare disbursements and electoral ethics is likely to remain a topic of discussion among parties, analysts, and the public. For now, the government maintains that the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana is a legitimate welfare initiative aimed at empowering women, and not a tool for electoral gain.

---