Wealth and criminal records dominate second phase of Jharkhand Assembly elections

Mail News Service

Ranchi: The upcoming second phase of the Jharkhand Assembly elections, set for November 20, is drawing attention due to the substantial wealth of many candidates, as well as their criminal backgrounds. Out of the 528 candidates contesting this phase, 127 are considered crorepatis, meaning their declared assets exceed Rs 1 crore.

The richest candidate in this phase is Samajwadi Party’s Aqeel Akhtar from the Pakur Assembly constituency, with assets worth Rs 402 crore. Following him is independent candidate Niranjan Rai from Dhanwar, who has assets worth Rs 131 crore. Other notable candidates include BJP’s Ganganarayan Singh from Madhupur, whose assets total Rs 15.61 crore, and JMM’s Kalpana Soren from Gandey, whose assets are valued at Rs 19.18 crore.

In total, 42 candidates have assets worth more than Rs 5 crore, while 38 candidates are in the Rs 50 lakh to 2 crore bracket. However, 136 candidates have reported assets worth less than Rs 10 lakh. This sharp contrast highlights the growing wealth disparity among candidates.

Alongside their wealth, many candidates also have criminal cases registered against them. A total of 148 candidates in this phase face legal charges, with 122 having serious criminal cases. Among these, 14 out of 32 BJP candidates, 4 out of 6 AJSU candidates, 5 out of 12 Congress candidates, 2 out of 2 RJD candidates, and 8 out of 24 BSP candidates are facing criminal cases. These figures raise concerns about the impact of such backgrounds on the electoral process.

At the other end of the spectrum, three candidates have reported the lowest possible assets. Independent Rajendra Mahato from Silli has declared his assets to be just Rs 100. Similarly, Jitendra Oraon from Khijri has listed assets worth Rs 2,500, and Anil Birua from Jharia, contesting under the SUSI banner, has declared his assets at Rs 10,000.

With the elections just around the corner, the focus remains on both the financial profiles and the legal standing of candidates, which could significantly influence voter perceptions and the outcome of the polls.