2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election
The 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election was held to elect 243 members to the Bihar Legislative Assembly, the lower house of the state legislature, across 38 districts of Bihar, India.[1] Conducted in five phases from 28 October to 7 November 2015, with results declared on 8 November, the polls saw approximately 6.7 crore electors participate at a voter turnout of 56.7 percent.[2][1] The contest primarily featured the Mahagathbandhan alliance—comprising the Janata Dal (United led by Nitish Kumar, the Rashtriya Janata Dal led by Lalu Prasad Yadav, and the Indian National Congress—against the National Democratic Alliance spearheaded by the Bharatiya Janata Party.[1] The Mahagathbandhan achieved a decisive majority with 178 seats (RJD: 80, JD(U): 71, Congress: 27), while the NDA secured 58 seats (BJP: 53, allies: 5), marking a substantial defeat for the BJP amid its post-2014 national momentum.[1] This outcome underscored the enduring influence of caste arithmetic in Bihar's politics, with consolidated support from Yadav and Muslim communities bolstering the victors, and facilitated Nitish Kumar's continuation as Chief Minister.[3] The election highlighted tensions between development-oriented appeals and identity-based mobilization, with the opposition's success attributed to effective anti-incumbency leveraging against the NDA's national leadership.[4]Historical and Political Context
Prior Governance and Legacy Issues
The governance of Bihar under Lalu Prasad Yadav and subsequent chief minister Rabri Devi from 1990 to 2005, frequently labeled "Jungle Raj" by opponents, featured pervasive lawlessness and socioeconomic decline. Crime surged, with kidnappings, murders, and caste-based violence becoming commonplace, often linked to political protection of criminal elements within the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) ecosystem.[5] [6] Economic performance lagged, recording Bihar's slowest per capita income growth over the 15-year span, with annual GDP expansion below national averages and frequently under 1% in real terms amid corruption scandals.[7] [8] Infrastructure deficits exacerbated out-migration, as lack of local employment drove millions to seek opportunities elsewhere, reinforcing perceptions of state failure.[9] Nitish Kumar's administration from November 2005 onward marked a pivot toward institutional reforms, yielding measurable gains in security and basic services despite critiques of fiscal dependence on central transfers. Law and order strengthened through targeted policing and justice system enhancements, reducing reported crimes and dismantling prior impunity networks.[10] Road networks expanded rapidly, connecting rural areas and facilitating commerce, while primary education enrollment rose via campaigns like bicycle distribution for girls.[11] Power supply improved from 2-3 hours daily in rural regions in 2005 to near 24-hour availability by mid-decade, with electrified villages increasing from approximately 14,000 to over 80% coverage by 2014.[12] [13] Economic growth accelerated to around 10% annually in the latter part of the tenure, though uneven distribution and reliance on Union budgets drew accusations of unsustainable progress.[14] The 2014 Lok Sabha elections underscored shifting voter priorities, with the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) securing 31 of Bihar's 40 seats, signaling endorsement of development-oriented governance over caste-based mobilization.[15] This outcome, driven by BJP's 22 wins alongside allies, heightened expectations for the 2015 assembly polls to affirm or challenge the post-2005 trajectory amid lingering disparities.[16]Caste Demographics and Voting Blocs
Bihar's electorate features a complex caste mosaic that profoundly influences political alignments, with estimates prior to the 2023 state survey placing upper castes (Brahmins, Bhumihars, Rajputs, and Kayasthas) at approximately 15% of the population, Yadavs at 14%, Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs)—comprising over 20 smaller backward castes—at 18-20%, Scheduled Castes (Dalits) at 16%, and Muslims at 17%.[17][18] These proportions, derived from academic and political analyses rather than a comprehensive official census, underscore the numerical dominance of backward and marginalized groups, totaling over 70% when combining OBCs, EBCs, Dalits, and Muslims.[19] Caste functions as a primary causal driver in Bihar's electoral dynamics, with empirical studies revealing persistent high intra-caste bloc voting rates, typically ranging from 80% to 90%, where voters prioritize caste affinity over alternative factors like development promises.[20] This pattern persists despite rhetorical shifts toward governance issues, as evidenced by post-poll surveys showing caste identity overriding economic considerations in vote choice for the majority of respondents across groups.[21] Historically, Lalu Prasad Yadav engineered the Muslim-Yadav (MY) consolidation in the 1990s, fusing Yadav loyalty with Muslim support to secure a reliable base exceeding 30% of votes in key elections, capitalizing on shared backward class and minority interests against upper-caste dominance.[22][23] Nitish Kumar countered this by cultivating EBC and Mahadalit (the most disadvantaged Dalit subgroups) blocs through targeted reservations and welfare schemes, eroding MY cohesion by offering alternative patronage networks to non-Yadav backward castes.[24][25] The NDA alliance, conversely, anchored itself in upper-caste solidarity supplemented by select OBC clusters such as Kurmis and Koeris, forming a counterweight reliant on consolidated elite and intermediate caste support.[26] These blocs illustrate how caste networks, reinforced by clientelistic mobilization, sustain electoral causality in Bihar's multipolar contests.[27]Economic Challenges and Development Debates
Bihar's economy in the lead-up to the 2015 legislative election was marked by persistent underdevelopment, with per capita net state domestic product at current prices estimated at ₹35,424 for 2014-15, the lowest among Indian states and roughly 41% of the national average.[28] The state's poverty headcount ratio stood at 33.7% in 2011-12 according to National Sample Survey Office data using the Tendulkar methodology, higher than the all-India figure of 21.9%, reflecting deep rural and urban deprivation despite some prior reductions.[29] High levels of labor out-migration underscored structural weaknesses, with estimates indicating 2-3 million Biharis annually seeking seasonal or semi-permanent employment outside the state due to limited local opportunities in agriculture and industry.[30] Under Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's administration since 2005, Bihar achieved average annual gross state domestic product growth exceeding 10%, attributed to improved law and order, road infrastructure expansion, and fiscal discipline, which attracted some investment and boosted service-sector activity.[31] However, this growth masked ongoing inequalities, as agricultural productivity remained stagnant amid flood-prone terrain and small landholdings, while industrial contribution to GSDP hovered below 5%, perpetuating dependence on remittances and informal labor markets.[32] Critics noted that per capita income gains, while real, failed to close the gap with more industrialized states, with rural electrification and irrigation coverage lagging national benchmarks despite targeted programs.[33] The election debates highlighted contrasting visions for addressing these challenges. The National Democratic Alliance emphasized alignment with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's national development paradigm, prioritizing large-scale infrastructure projects, foreign direct investment, and skill development to reduce migration and foster manufacturing hubs, positioning Bihar's progress as contingent on central funding and policy integration.[34] In contrast, the Mahagathbandhan coalition advocated a welfare-oriented approach rooted in social justice, focusing on caste-based affirmative measures, expanded rural subsidies, and populist schemes to mitigate immediate hardships, arguing that Nitish's governance model required bolstering through Yadav-Muslim consolidation rather than top-down economic liberalization.[34] Evidence from state economic surveys indicated that while growth accelerated post-2005, distributional inequities persisted, with upper-caste and urban areas benefiting disproportionately compared to marginalized rural blocs.[28] Central schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act played a pivotal role in rural economies but revealed implementation shortfalls in Bihar. By 2014-15, the average person-days of employment generated per participating household was approximately 38, well below the statutory 100 days, due to funding delays, corruption allegations, and inadequate worksite facilities, limiting its impact on poverty alleviation despite high rural demand.[35] State-level data showed uneven coverage, with only about 10-15% of rural households accessing benefits annually, exacerbating debates over whether such programs substituted for or complemented broader structural reforms needed for sustainable job creation.[36] These gaps fueled arguments that welfare entitlements alone could not resolve underlying issues like low skill levels and infrastructural deficits without complementary investments in education and industry.Pre-Election Developments
2015 Political Crisis and Leadership Shifts
 Following the Janata Dal (United)'s defeat in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, where the party secured only two seats in Bihar, Nitish Kumar resigned as Chief Minister on May 20, 2014, citing moral responsibility for the loss, and nominated Jitan Ram Manjhi, a relatively obscure Dalit leader from the Musahar community, as his successor.[37] Manjhi was sworn in the same day, initially perceived as a placeholder to maintain JD(U) control amid internal pressures and the absence of a formal coalition partner after the breakup with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).[37] However, by early February 2015, dissatisfaction with Manjhi's administrative style and perceived alignment with the BJP grew within JD(U) ranks, prompting Kumar to signal his intent to reclaim leadership.[38] The crisis escalated on February 7, 2015, when the JD(U) legislature party elected Nitish Kumar as its leader, backed by a majority of MLAs, leading to the resignation of 20 ministers in solidarity against Manjhi.[38] On February 9, JD(U) expelled Manjhi from the party for defying directives and courting controversies, yet he refused to resign, asserting he would prove his majority on the assembly floor and staking claim to form a new government with potential external support.[37][39] Governor Keshari Nath Tripathi directed Manjhi to demonstrate majority via a floor test by February 20, amid legal challenges from Kumar's camp in the Patna High Court, which affirmed Kumar's position as legislative party leader while allowing the test to proceed.[40] This revolt highlighted internal fissures, with approximately 97 of 111 JD(U) MLAs pledging support to Kumar, indicating limited but disruptive defections estimated at around 14 legislators initially backing Manjhi.[41] Kumar's maneuvers, including public criticisms of Manjhi as engaging in "fraud" rather than legitimate rebellion, underscored a calculated effort to consolidate power and reposition JD(U) against the rising BJP influence post-2014 national polls.[42] Facing the floor test, Manjhi resigned on February 20, 2015, averting a direct vote and clearing the path for Kumar's return.[43] Kumar was sworn in as Chief Minister for the second time on February 22, 2015, a development that fueled speculation of early assembly dissolution and snap polls to capitalize on renewed momentum, though the full term extended to November.[44] The episode exposed JD(U)'s vulnerability to personality-driven splits, with Manjhi later forming the Hindustani Awam Morcha, taking a handful of defectors and eroding the party's cohesion ahead of the electoral contest.[41]Alliance Formations and Strategies
The Mahagathbandhan, a coalition of the Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), and Indian National Congress, emerged in July 2015 as a strategic pre-poll pact prioritizing caste-based vote consolidation over ideological alignment. This alliance sought to unite Muslim-Yadav (MY) blocs with Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) and Dalit communities, which together formed a significant portion of Bihar's electorate, to counter the ruling NDA. The seat-sharing formula, finalized and announced on September 20, 2015, allocated 101 seats each to RJD and JD(U), with Congress contesting 41 seats out of the assembly's 243 constituencies.[45] In response, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), spearheaded by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) after its 2013 split from JD(U), assembled a broader but fragmented coalition including the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP), Rashtriya Lok Samata Party (RLSP), Hindustani Awam Morcha (HAM), and smaller outfits. Seat-sharing negotiations, marked by internal bargaining among allies, concluded on September 14, 2015, with BJP contesting the majority of seats to leverage its organizational strength while allocating portions to partners representing specific caste groups like Dusadhs (LJP) and Kushwahas (RLSP). The NDA's approach emphasized mobilizing upper-caste Hindus alongside non-Yadav OBCs, aiming to offset the Mahagathbandhan's MY-EBC axis through targeted sub-caste appeals rather than a unified ideological platform.[46][47] Peripheral alliances, such as the Left Front (encompassing CPI, CPI(M), and CPI(ML) Liberation) and the Socialist Secular Morcha (led by the Samajwadi Party with allies like the Nationalist Congress Party), operated independently or in loose groupings, contesting a limited number of seats without significant seat-sharing pacts. These fronts targeted niche voter segments like urban workers and secular-leaning minorities but lacked the scale to influence outcomes, reflecting Bihar's dominance by bipolar caste-driven contests.[48]Key Political Figures: Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad Yadav
 Nitish Kumar, as leader of the Janata Dal (United), served as Chief Minister of Bihar from November 2005, introducing the "Sushasan" or good governance model focused on restoring law and order, improving infrastructure, and enhancing public service delivery. His administration oversaw the construction of extensive road networks, including over 20,000 kilometers of rural roads by 2010, and significant gains in electrification, with household connections rising from near zero to over 90% by the mid-2010s through targeted programs. Economic growth accelerated under his rule, with Bihar's GDP growth averaging above 10% annually from 2005 to 2014, reversing prior stagnation.[49][50] Critics, however, have highlighted Kumar's pattern of alliance realignments, such as his 2013 split from the BJP-led NDA in 2014 ahead of the state polls, as pragmatic but opportunistic maneuvers to retain power rather than ideological consistency.[4] Lalu Prasad Yadav, founder and long-time president of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), gained prominence in the 1990s by mobilizing backward castes, particularly Yadavs and other Other Backward Classes (OBCs), through policies emphasizing social empowerment and reservation expansions, which shifted political power away from upper castes and fostered a sense of dignity among marginalized groups. During his chief ministership from 1990 to 1997 and through proxy rule via his wife Rabri Devi until 2005, Yadav's family entrenched a dynastic structure, with son Tejashwi Yadav emerging as a key figure by 2015. His governance, however, was undermined by systemic corruption, most notably convictions in the fodder scam, where courts found him guilty in multiple cases of diverting over Rs 950 crore from animal husbandry funds, including a 2013 sentence of five years' imprisonment in the Deoghar treasury case. Empirical data from the period indicate economic neglect, with Bihar's per capita income growth lagging national averages at under 5% annually and infrastructure deficits persisting, contributing to the state's "BIMARU" label.[51][52][53][8] Despite longstanding animosity—stemming from Kumar's 2005 electoral defeat of Yadav's RJD—the two reconciled in early 2015 to form the Mahagathbandhan coalition, allying JD(U), RJD, and Congress primarily to counter the BJP's rising influence by uniting backward caste, Muslim, and Dalit voters through complementary strengths: Kumar's administrative record paired with Yadav's grassroots mobilization. This strategic pivot, announced on October 22, 2014, after Kumar's NDA exit, was driven by shared anti-BJP objectives amid fears of Modi's national appeal eroding their bases, though it drew skepticism over ideological compatibility given Yadav's corruption taint and past governance clashes.[54][3]Electoral Framework
Election Schedule and Phased Polling
The Election Commission of India announced the schedule for the 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election on 9 September 2015, opting for a five-phase polling process spanning 12 October to 5 November 2015 to cover all 243 constituencies across the state's 38 districts.[55][56] This staggered timeline allowed for the sequential movement of security forces, addressing logistical constraints in deploying approximately 200,000 central and state personnel to sensitive areas with a history of booth capturing and clashes in prior polls.[57][58] Polling in the first phase occurred on 12 October across 49 constituencies in 10 districts, primarily in the northern and eastern regions; the second phase on 16 October covered 42 seats in 6 districts; the third on 28 October involved 50 constituencies in 6 districts; the fourth on 1 November spanned 55 seats in 7 districts; and the fifth on 5 November encompassed 47 constituencies in 9 districts.[59][60] The multi-phase format, despite demands from major parties for fewer phases to minimize campaign disruptions, prioritized security coverage over a compressed single-day vote, enabling forces to be repositioned after each round while minimizing simultaneous vulnerabilities across the geographically diverse state.[58] Nomination processes were aligned with each phase: notifications were issued starting around 25 September for the first phase, with the last date for filing nominations generally 10-11 days prior to polling, scrutiny conducted the following day, and a three-day window for withdrawals thereafter.[57] For the fifth phase, scrutiny was revised to 16 October due to administrative adjustments.[61] In total, around 3,500 candidates filed nominations, reflecting intense competition amid alliances and independents vying for seats.[1]Procedural Changes and Security Enhancements
The Election Commission of India (ECI) deployed Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) at all polling stations during the 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election, representing a significant scale-up from partial usage in prior polls to full implementation across the state's constituencies. This shift aimed to curb electoral fraud, particularly booth capturing, which had peaked in Bihar during the 1990s with multiple documented instances per election. Empirical analysis shows EVMs reduced such malpractices by design, as they eliminated the physical handling and stuffing of ballot papers, leading to fewer reported booth captures compared to paper-based systems; a Brookings Institution study quantified this impact, finding electoral fraud indicators dropped post-EVM adoption nationwide, with safer polling environments in high-risk states like Bihar.[62][63] Security protocols were bolstered through unprecedented deployment of central paramilitary forces at every one of the 62,779 polling stations, a first for any Indian state election, to deter intimidation and ensure voter access in vulnerable areas. Aerial surveillance via drones was introduced for real-time monitoring of polling processes, enhancing oversight in remote and Naxal-affected districts without reliance on traditional ground patrols alone. These measures, combined with phased polling over five dates from October 12 to November 5, facilitated verifiable vote recording amid Bihar's challenging terrain and history of disruptions.[64][65][66] Enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct was intensified with district-level directives from the ECI, including rapid response teams for violations like unauthorized rallies or defacements, contributing to procedural discipline across the 243 constituencies. While Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) units were not yet piloted in Bihar—limited to experimental use elsewhere—the EVM framework's randomization and sealing protocols provided audit trails, with post-poll checks confirming alignment between machine tallies and manual verification samples.[67][68]Voter Eligibility and Turnout Projections
The electorate eligible to vote in the 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election totaled 66,970,702 general electors, as finalized in the electoral rolls by the Election Commission of India ahead of polling.[2] Voter eligibility adhered to the Representation of the People Act, 1950, requiring Indian citizenship, completion of 18 years of age by the qualifying date of January 1, 2015, ordinary residence within the relevant constituency for at least six months, and exclusion from disqualifications such as imprisonment exceeding two years, corrupt practices, or government employment on polling day. This electorate reflected Bihar's demographic realities, with males numbering 35,715,925 and females 31,252,671, resulting in a gender registration gap of roughly 12.5 percentage points.[2] State-level drives under the Nitish Kumar administration, including promotion of women's self-help groups and local governance participation, had incrementally reduced this disparity from prior elections by boosting female enrollment, though systemic barriers like lower literacy and mobility persisted.[69] The composition remained overwhelmingly rural, aligning with the 2011 census data showing Bihar's urban population at 11.3%, thus over 88% of voters derived from rural constituencies where agricultural and caste-based mobilization dominated. Constituency boundaries, redrawn via the Delimitation Commission's exercise notified in 2008 and based on the 2001 census, standardized approximate voter sizes per seat to around 275,000 while adjusting for population shifts, thereby enhancing representation in emerging urban pockets such as Patna and its suburbs without altering the total of 243 seats. Pre-election analyses projected elevated turnout owing to the polarized rivalry between the Mahagathbandhan and National Democratic Alliance, surpassing the 52.6% of the 2010 polls, with expectations of 58-62% overall participation fueled by youth engagement—the 18-25 age cohort comprising approximately 20% of electors—and intensified rural mobilization efforts.[4] Such forecasts emphasized the potential sway of first-time and young voters in swing constituencies, amid ECI campaigns to leverage high-stakes contestation for broader enfranchisement.[70]Contesting Entities
Mahagathbandhan Composition and Seat-Sharing
The Mahagathbandhan, comprising the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), and Indian National Congress (INC), formed in July 2015 as a coalition aimed at countering the National Democratic Alliance in Bihar. The alliance projected Nitish Kumar, leader of JD(U), as its chief ministerial candidate, capitalizing on his incumbency and administrative record, while relying on RJD's grassroots mobilization under Lalu Prasad Yadav to consolidate support among Yadav and Muslim voters.[71][72] Seat-sharing negotiations concluded on August 12, 2015, allocating 101 seats to RJD, 101 to JD(U), and 41 to Congress out of Bihar's 243 assembly constituencies. This arrangement reflected RJD and JD(U)'s dominant roles in the state's backward caste politics, with RJD focusing on Yadav-stronghold areas and JD(U) targeting Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) and Kurmis, while Congress was assigned seats in regions with historical upper-caste and minority influence. The deal prioritized winnability over equal distribution, enabling a unified caste-arithmetic approach to maximize vote transfer among allied social groups.[73][74][75] The coalition's strategy emphasized social justice and welfare for marginalized communities, including promises of enhanced reservations for EBCs and women, alongside critiques of central government policies perceived as neglecting Bihar's developmental needs. RJD provided electoral muscle through its cadre network in rural Yadav-dominated belts, complementing JD(U)'s governance narrative under Kumar, though internal tensions over candidate selection occasionally surfaced during nominations. This composition underscored a pragmatic fusion of caste mobilization and anti-incumbency against the NDA, without formal inclusion of smaller leftist parties at the outset.[76][71]National Democratic Alliance Platform and Candidates
The National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), adopted a platform emphasizing Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas (development with all, development for all), positioning itself against caste-based mobilization by prioritizing economic growth, infrastructure, employment generation, education reforms, and healthcare improvements tailored to Bihar's needs.[77][78] Prime Minister Narendra Modi highlighted a six-point development agenda during the campaign rollout, focusing on youth employment, skill development, and poverty alleviation to contrast with the perceived failures of prior caste-centric governance in the state.[78] This narrative sought to appeal to a broad electorate by underscoring national-level achievements under NDA rule, such as improved governance metrics and central funding for Bihar-specific projects. Seat-sharing within the NDA allocated the BJP 157 constituencies, the Lok Janshakti Party (LJP) 40, the Rashtriya Lok Samata Party (RLSP) 23, and smaller allies like the Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) a handful, totaling over 180 seats contested collectively to challenge the incumbent coalition's dominance.[79] The candidate selection process reflected BJP's reliance on upper-caste strongholds, with a significant proportion of nominees from Bhumihar, Rajput, Brahmin, and Kayastha communities—groups that provided near-unanimous support to the alliance in prior polls—while allies like LJP (Dalit-focused) and RLSP (Kushwaha OBC) facilitated outreach to non-upper-caste voters.[4][80] This mix aimed to balance traditional BJP base loyalty with incremental gains among Other Backward Classes (OBCs), though upper-caste candidates dominated the overall NDA slate, comprising roughly 40-50% in BJP's allocations per contemporaneous analyses.[81] Sushil Kumar Modi, a prominent BJP figure and Leader of the Opposition in Bihar's assembly, exemplified the NDA's upper-caste leadership core, overseeing strategy against the ruling dispensation.[82] Despite these efforts, the NDA's OBC consolidation proved uneven, with fragmented support among Extremely Backward Classes limiting broader inroads.[4]Fringe Parties, Independents, and Muslim-Focused Groups
The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation, the leading component of the Left Front, contested independently and secured three seats with a vote share of 1.5 percent.[83] Other Left parties, such as the Communist Party of India (Marxist), fielded candidates but won no seats.[84] The Bahujan Samaj Party contested multiple constituencies targeting Dalit voters but obtained zero seats.[1] Muslim-focused parties included the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), which made its debut in Bihar by fielding candidates in six seats, mainly in the Muslim-majority Seemanchal region, yet won none.[85] Independents, numbering among the thousands of total candidates and frequently backed by local strongmen or caste loyalties, captured four seats.[86] Collectively, these fringe entities and independents accounted for under 5 percent of the statewide vote share.[1]Campaign and Issues
Core Campaign Narratives: Development vs. Caste Arithmetic
The National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), centered its campaign on a development-oriented narrative, portraying Prime Minister Narendra Modi's governance model as the antidote to Bihar's persistent underdevelopment. Campaigners highlighted the state's economic lag, including high out-migration and low industrialization, despite Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's earlier tenure, and promised an accelerated industrial push leveraging national momentum from 2014. A key element was the announcement of a special economic package worth approximately $19 billion to fund infrastructure and job creation, framed as extending the "Vikas Raj" (rule of development) achieved during the 2005–2013 NDA-JD(U) alliance, which saw per capita income growth of around 8.4% in fiscal year 2014–15.[4][87] This was reinforced through over 30 rallies addressed by Modi between September and November 2015, where he critiqued the Nitish-Lalu Prasad Yadav alliance as a regression to caste-driven politics over empirical progress.[88][4] In contrast, the Mahagathbandhan (Grand Alliance of JD(U), Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), and Congress) defended Nitish Kumar's record of governance reforms, emphasizing social justice gains through welfare schemes, improved law and order, and infrastructure that contributed to Bihar's gross state domestic product growth averaging over 10% annually from 2005 to 2015.[14][4] The alliance's strategy relied on caste bloc mobilization, consolidating votes among Yadavs, Muslims, Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs), and Mahadalits—groups historically aligned with RJD's Yadav base and JD(U)'s backward caste outreach—while portraying the NDA's appeals as divisive fear-mongering targeting minorities.[4] This was operationalized through joint tours by Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad Yadav, including high-profile rallies like the Swabhiman rally in Patna on August 30, 2015, attended by Congress leaders, which underscored unity against perceived BJP communalism rather than prioritizing development metrics.[89][4] The clash highlighted a fundamental divide: the NDA's push for causal economic realism through centralized industrial initiatives versus the Mahagathbandhan's reliance on decentralized social equity via identity-based coalitions, with empirical data on growth rates contested but not fundamentally disputed by either side.[4][14] While the NDA invoked verifiable national-level reforms post-2014, the Mahagathbandhan countered with state-specific welfare outcomes, framing the election as a defense of marginalized communities against upper-caste dominance implied in NDA alliances.[4]Media and Polarization Tactics
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) incorporated rhetoric on cow protection and opposition to beef consumption into its campaign messaging, aiming to consolidate Hindu voters through references to cultural and religious sensitivities. On October 5, 2015, BJP leader Sushil Kumar Modi described the election as a contest "between beef-eaters and those wanting to ban it," framing dietary practices in oppositional terms to evoke communal divides.[90] This approach drew complaints from rival parties, who argued it violated the Election Commission's model code of conduct prohibiting appeals to communal sentiments.[91] In response, the Election Commission of India (ECI) banned BJP advertisements on November 4, 2015, that demanded explanations from Chief Minister Nitish Kumar regarding beef-related remarks by his allies, deeming them divisive and in breach of electoral guidelines against inflaming passions on religious lines.[92] [93] The ECI's interventions extended to monitoring campaign speeches and media content for hate speech, issuing advisories to prevent vitiation of the electoral atmosphere through polarizing narratives.[94] Such tactics reportedly risked alienating Extremely Backward Castes (EBCs) and Muslim voters, who comprised significant portions of the electorate, by associating the BJP with exclusionary appeals rather than inclusive development.[95] Social media platforms gained prominence in the 2015 campaign as parties disseminated messages to younger demographics, though complaints of misinformation and manipulated content surfaced, prompting ECI scrutiny under existing conduct rules. English-language media outlets often critiqued these polarization efforts as counterproductive, highlighting their potential to fragment voter coalitions in Bihar's diverse caste landscape, while regional vernacular media varied in coverage, sometimes amplifying local caste-based interpretations over national ideological framing.[94] [96] The ECI's enforcement against violative content underscored efforts to curb escalation, with documented actions against ads and speeches that crossed into communal territory.[91]Pre-Election Opinion Polls and Predictions
Prior to the formation of the Mahagathbandhan alliance in July 2015, opinion polls consistently projected a strong performance for the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), reflecting the weakened position of Nitish Kumar's Janata Dal (United) following its poor showing in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.[97] For instance, an India Today-Cicero pre-poll survey conducted around September 10, 2015, forecasted the NDA securing a simple majority of over 120 seats in the 243-member assembly, attributing this to BJP's organizational edge and Modi's national appeal.[98] Following the Mahagathbandhan's emergence—comprising JD(U), Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), and Congress—subsequent surveys indicated a tightening contest, with the alliance polling around 40-46% vote share in some estimates. A CNN-IBN/IBN7-Axis pre-poll survey from October 8, 2015, projected 137 seats for the Mahagathbandhan (JD(U) 69, RJD 48, Congress 20) against 95 for the NDA, based on a 46% vote share for the former versus 38% for the latter.[99] Similarly, an India TV-CVoter survey estimated a near tie, with the Mahagathbandhan at 116 seats and NDA at 119. However, other polls like a Zee Media survey from September 18, 2015, still favored the NDA with 140 seats and 50.8% vote share against the alliance's 70 seats and 42.5%.[99] A Lokniti-CSDS pre-poll from October 7, 2015, showed the NDA holding a narrow 4% vote lead, particularly in urban areas.[97] These divergent predictions fostered overconfidence within NDA ranks, as surveys emphasizing BJP's momentum overshadowed those highlighting the Mahagathbandhan's caste consolidation among Muslims, Yadavs, and Kurmis.[97] Methodological limitations, including reliance on self-reported preferences and under-sampling of rural women voters—who ultimately turned out in higher numbers favoring Nitish Kumar's development record—contributed to inaccuracies across polls.[99] Regionally, polls highlighted NDA advantages in Seemanchal districts, driven by upper-caste consolidation and targeted outreach to non-Yadav OBCs, projecting stronger vote shares there compared to Yadav-dominated belts in central Bihar, where RJD's influence was expected to deliver overwhelming Mahagathbandhan support.[97] Such variations underscored the challenges of capturing localized caste dynamics in statewide sampling.[99]Election Execution
Polling Day Logistics and Voter Turnout
The 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election was conducted in five phases between 20 October and 7 November to facilitate security arrangements and logistical management across the state's 243 constituencies.[100] Phase one covered 49 constituencies on 20 October, followed by 32 on 28 October, 50 on 1 November, 55 on 5 November, and the final 57 on 7 November.[101] Voter turnout reached 56.66 percent overall, marking the highest participation rate in Bihar's assembly elections since independence.[100] [102] This figure surpassed the 52.65 percent recorded in the 2010 election, reflecting improved electoral mobilization efforts by the Election Commission of India.[103] Female voter turnout significantly outpaced male participation, with 60.48 percent of women voting compared to 53.32 percent of men, a disparity attributed to targeted outreach and higher enthusiasm among female electors.[102] This gender gap was evident across phases, including the first phase where women achieved 59.5 percent turnout against 54.5 percent for men.[104]Incidents of Violence, Malpractices, and EVM Deployment
Despite Bihar's historical association with electoral violence, the 2015 Legislative Assembly election saw relatively fewer major incidents, with polling largely peaceful amid heightened security in Maoist-affected districts such as Gaya, Aurangabad, and Jamui. Maoist groups issued boycott calls and threatened voters through leaflets, but no large-scale disruptions from insurgency were reported during voting phases. Sporadic clashes occurred, including one post-poll death in Ara linked to caste tensions following results announcement on November 8, 2015.[105][106][107] Allegations of booth capturing and other malpractices were notably subdued compared to prior decades, when such tactics involved seizing polling stations to stuff ballot boxes. The shift was largely credited to Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs), which eliminated the feasibility of mass ballot insertion and reduced opportunities for physical fraud, though concerns like cash-for-votes persisted as alternative inducements. No substantiated reports of widespread booth looting emerged, reflecting improved enforcement and technological safeguards.[108][62][109] EVMs were utilized at 100% of Bihar's approximately 65,000 polling stations across the five-phase election from October 12 to November 5, 2015, featuring candidate photographs on ballot units for voter clarity. While pre-poll skepticism about potential tampering circulated among some opposition figures, post-election audits and court challenges yielded no empirical proof of hacking or systemic manipulation specific to Bihar; discrepancies, when alleged, were isolated and unverified. This deployment contrasted with the paper-ballot era's vulnerabilities to stuffing, contributing to higher voter confidence and fewer fraud complaints.[110][111][112] The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered repolling in select disrupted booths, including one each in Banka and Chakai on October 25, 2015, following complaints of irregularities like damaged equipment or voter intimidation. Such interventions were limited, underscoring the overall integrity of the process despite isolated lapses.[113]Immediate Post-Poll Observations and Exit Polls
Exit polls conducted after the final phase of polling on November 5, 2015, largely forecasted a closely contested outcome between the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and the Mahagathbandhan, with predictions varying from a hung assembly to a narrow edge for either side. India Today-CICERO projected the NDA securing 113-127 seats and the Mahagathbandhan 111-123 seats in the 243-member assembly, suggesting potential instability. Today's Chanakya, known for prior accuracies, anticipated a stronger NDA performance with 155 seats against 85 for the Mahagathbandhan. These projections, aired across major channels like CNN-IBN and India Today, underestimated the Mahagathbandhan's eventual dominance and highlighted methodological challenges in capturing rural and caste-based voter shifts in Bihar.[114][115] One outlier, the Axis poll, accurately foresaw a Mahagathbandhan victory with 169-183 seats but was reportedly withheld by CNN-IBN due to its divergence from prevailing narratives favoring a tighter race. Post-poll commentary attributed the broader inaccuracies to sampling biases, particularly underrepresenting consolidation among Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) and Dalits toward Nitish Kumar's JD(U)-led alliance, as initial booth-level data hinted at stronger-than-expected turnout and preference alignment in Yadav-Muslim-EBC belts during early trend analyses. Media outlets noted that exit polls struggled with Bihar's fragmented demographics and last-minute tactical voting, leading to a rare instance where pre-count predictions misaligned sharply with underlying electoral dynamics.[116][117][118] As counting commenced on November 8, 2015, preliminary observations from returning officers indicated tight margins in over 50 constituencies, prompting extended verification processes and delaying final round announcements in select segments, though overall trends emerged decisively by midday. Party agents reported heightened scrutiny at booths with razor-thin leads, reflecting the exit polls' anticipated competitiveness, but early leads favoring the Mahagathbandhan in key districts like Patna and Muzaffarpur contradicted the hung-assembly forecasts. These immediate post-poll insights underscored voter secrecy's role in evading pollsters, with NDA leaders acknowledging the shift in momentum shortly after initial rounds.[119]Results and Data
Aggregate Seat and Vote Shares
The Mahagathbandhan alliance, consisting of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), and Indian National Congress (INC), won 178 seats in the 243-member Bihar Legislative Assembly.[1] This included 80 seats for RJD, 71 for JD(U), and 27 for INC.[1] The National Democratic Alliance (NDA), comprising the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Lok Janshakti Party (LJP), Rashtriya Lok Samata Party (RLSP), and Hindustani Awam Morcha (Secular) (HAM(S)), secured 58 seats, with BJP taking 53, LJP 2, RLSP 2, and HAM(S) 1.[1] [74] The remaining 7 seats went to other parties and independents, including 3 for the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation.[1] In terms of vote shares, the BJP led all individual parties with 24.42% of the votes polled.[1] [74] The Mahagathbandhan collectively garnered approximately 41.84%, comprising RJD's 18.35%, JD(U)'s 16.83%, and INC's 6.66%.[1] The NDA's combined vote share was around 33%, including LJP's 4.83% and RLSP's 2.56%.[1]| Party/Alliance | Seats Won | Vote Share (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Mahagathbandhan (RJD + JD(U) + INC) | 178 | 41.84 |
| NDA (BJP + LJP + RLSP + HAM(S)) | 58 | ~33 |
| Others | 7 | ~25 |
Breakdown by Party, Alliance, and District
The Mahagathbandhan alliance, comprising the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), and Indian National Congress (INC), secured 178 of the 243 seats, with vote shares totaling approximately 41%. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) along with smaller partners, won 58 seats at 36.4% vote share. Three seats went to independent candidates, while minor parties and others accounted for the remainder.[1]| Alliance/Party | Seats Won | Change from 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| Mahagathbandhan | 178 | +109 |
| RJD | 80 | +51 |
| JD(U) | 71 | +15 |
| INC | 27 | +20 |
| NDA | 58 | -115 |
| BJP | 53 | -92 |
| LJP | 2 | -1 |
| RLSP | 2 | +2 |
| HAM | 1 | New |
| Independents/Others | 7 | - |
Constituency-Level Outcomes and Margins
The election produced highly competitive outcomes in many constituencies, with 21 seats where the victory margin was narrower than the votes polled for None of the Above (NOTA), reflecting intense local battles and voter divisions.[120] These close races often hinged on shifts in caste-based alliances, particularly where the Grand Alliance (JD(U)-RJD-Congress) consolidated support among Extremely Backward Classes, Yadavs, and Muslims to overcome NDA advantages in upper-caste areas.[76] Nitish Kumar retained his stronghold in Biharsharif, securing victory as the JD(U) candidate in a constituency with significant Koeri and Kurmi populations, bolstering the Grand Alliance's hold on development-oriented backward caste voters.[121] Similarly, the RJD fortified its Yadav base through family legacies, with Tejashwi Prasad Yadav winning Raghopur by 22,733 votes (12.3% margin) against BJP's Satish Kumar.[122] His brother, Tej Pratap Yadav, prevailed in Mahua by an even larger margin, ensuring the Lalu family's clean sweep in contested seats despite NDA challenges.[123] The BJP faced notable upsets in upper-caste dominated areas, losing seats like Bhagalpur where caste consolidation against perceived NDA polarization favored the Grand Alliance, even as BJP polled strongly among Bhumihars and Rajputs statewide.[124] Such reversals highlighted tactical missteps in candidate selection and alliance dynamics, contributing to narrower wins for NDA survivors in similar demographics.[125]Analytical Insights
Caste and Demographic Voting Patterns
Caste loyalties remained a dominant force in the 2015 Bihar Legislative Assembly election, with voting patterns aligning closely along traditional bloc lines as captured in the Lokniti-CSDS post-poll survey. Yadavs, the core support base of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), extended over 90% of their votes to the Mahagathbandhan alliance (comprising RJD, Janata Dal (United), and Indian National Congress), reflecting the enduring influence of Lalu Prasad Yadav's Yadav-centric mobilization. Similarly, Muslims, constituting about 17% of the electorate, consolidated nearly unanimously behind the same alliance, prioritizing communal security and opposition to the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) amid perceptions of polarization.[126][127] Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs), a diverse group making up around 36% of voters and key to Nitish Kumar's strategy, split approximately 60-40 in favor of the Mahagathbandhan over the NDA, driven by Kumar's targeted outreach through reservations and development promises tailored to their sub-castes. Upper castes, including Brahmins, Rajputs, and Bhumihars (about 15% of the population), delivered around 70% support to the NDA, viewing it as a bulwark against perceived Yadav resurgence and aligning with BJP's Hindutva appeals. Other OBC groups like Kurmis largely backed the Mahagathbandhan, while Dalits showed fragmentation, with non-Paswan Dalits tilting toward the alliance but Paswans splitting closer to even. These patterns underscore caste's causal primacy in structuring vote blocs, overriding broader ideological shifts.[126][76] Gender dynamics revealed a cross-caste preference among women for the Mahagathbandhan, attributed to Nitish Kumar's record on improving law and order since 2005, which reduced crime rates and enhanced women's safety perceptions compared to the prior RJD era. Women turnout exceeded male turnout at 59.5% overall, with survey respondents citing safety as a key concern (26% in prioritized issues), contributing to a subtle shift where women across castes favored the alliance's continuity on governance stability over NDA's change narrative.[126][128] The urban-rural divide exerted minimal influence on these patterns, with rural voters (89% of the sample) mirroring statewide caste alignments due to Bihar's agrarian demographics and limited urban penetration of alternative narratives; urban pockets showed slightly stronger NDA support among upper castes but not enough to alter bloc behaviors.[126]Influence of Economic Factors and Anti-Incumbency
Nitish Kumar's administration emphasized infrastructure and welfare, which tempered anti-incumbency in the 2015 election. From 2005 to 2010, the government constructed over 23,000 kilometers of high-quality roads, improving rural connectivity and facilitating economic mobility.[129] By 2014–2015, Bihar achieved 8.4% per capita income growth, ranking second among Indian states, alongside advancements in electricity supply and inflation control.[4] These measurable gains in governance performance reduced voter dissatisfaction, as pre-election surveys indicated approval for Nitish's record despite calls for faster progress.[4] The Grand Alliance's partnership with Lalu Prasad Yadav introduced risks from his prior corruption convictions, including the 1990s fodder scam involving ₹940 crore embezzlement. However, Nitish's association with these elements was offset by his administration's tangible outputs, such as expanded welfare schemes and restored law and order, which voters credited for state-level stability over historical lapses.[125] Narendra Modi's nationwide development promises, including a $19 billion package for Bihar, faced dilution against Nitish's localized achievements.[4] Voter priorities on employment and infrastructure underscored economic realism, with studies of electoral behavior attributing 20–30% of non-demographic vote shifts to perceived development efficacy rather than solely alliance dynamics.[20] This evidenced development's causal role in sustaining incumbency advantages amid competitive narratives.[125]Comparative Performance Against 2014 Lok Sabha Trends
In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the NDA secured 31 of Bihar's 40 parliamentary seats, benefiting from a fragmented opposition where the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and Congress alliance polled around 29% combined, while the Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)), contesting independently after its split from the BJP, garnered approximately 6% of votes, diluting anti-NDA support and enabling disproportionate seat gains despite the NDA's core vote share of roughly 40% from BJP (29.9%), Lok Janshakti Party (6.5%), Rashtriya Lok Samata Party (3%), and minor allies.[16][15] This outcome reflected the temporary boost from national momentum, including the "Modi wave," which prioritized development narratives over localized caste mobilizations.[76] By the 2015 assembly elections, the NDA's vote share dipped to 34.9%, yielding only 58 of 243 seats, as the Mahagathbandhan (JD(U), RJD, Congress) consolidated to 42.9% votes and swept 178 seats through efficient caste-based vote transfer among Yadav, Muslim, and Extremely Backward Class blocs.[86] The opposition's unity absorbed the JD(U)'s prior independent votes, neutralizing the split that had favored the NDA in 2014, while the absence of national coattails exposed vulnerabilities to state-level dynamics like perceived over-reliance on upper-caste consolidation and critiques of governance under Nitish Kumar's prior NDA ties.[76]| Year/Event | NDA Vote Share | NDA Seats | Mahagathbandhan/Opposition Vote Share | Opposition Seats |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 Lok Sabha | ~40% | 31/40 | Split (~35% core + JD(U) 6%) | 9/40 |
| 2015 Assembly | 34.9% | 58/243 | 42.9% | 178/243 |