After remaining away from the state for more than a month, leader of the opposition in the Bihar assembly, Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, returned to Patna on Sunday and alleged large-scale “poll rigging” in the assembly elections that have brought the National Democratic Alliance back to power. Speaking briefly to reporters at Jay Prakash Narayan International Airport, Yadav said the electoral process had been compromised in several constituencies and claimed the mandate did not reflect the will of voters. At the same time, he announced that he would refrain from speaking against the NDA government’s policies, decisions and programmes for the first 100 days of its tenure.Yadav’s statement marked his first public intervention since the election results were declared and followed weeks of speculation about his absence from Bihar. The Rashtriya Janata Dal leader said he had taken time away for personal and political reflection after what he described as an “unexpected outcome”, while reiterating that the opposition alliance would examine the results in detail before deciding its next course of action. He alleged that irregularities had occurred during polling and counting, pointing to complaints from party workers about malfunctioning electronic voting machines, voter list discrepancies and what he described as administrative bias.
The NDA, led in the state by the Janata Dal, secured a majority in the assembly, returning to office amid a polarised campaign centred on governance record, welfare delivery and law and order. The opposition Mahagathbandhan, anchored by the RJD, had projected confidence during the campaign and claimed momentum in several regions, particularly in north and central Bihar. Yadav’s allegation of poll manipulation echoes complaints raised by opposition parties in other states following closely contested elections, though election authorities have consistently rejected such claims, citing established safeguards and audit mechanisms.
Election Commission officials in Bihar have maintained that the polls were conducted in a free and fair manner, with multi-layered security arrangements, mock polls before voting, and mandatory verification protocols during counting. They have said that all complaints received during the election period were addressed through due process. Senior officials have also noted that candidates have the legal option of approaching the courts if they believe electoral laws were violated.
Yadav’s decision to observe a 100-day restraint on criticising the new government was framed as an act of democratic responsibility. He said the opposition would allow the administration time to outline its priorities and begin implementation before offering a detailed critique. The move mirrors a convention occasionally adopted in parliamentary politics, though it is not formally mandated. Political analysts say the announcement may be aimed at striking a balance between sustaining allegations of electoral malpractice and projecting statesmanship after defeat.
Within the RJD, reactions to Yadav’s remarks have been mixed. Some senior leaders have backed his call for patience, arguing that sustained engagement with public issues, rather than immediate confrontation, would strengthen the party’s position. Others have privately expressed concern that a prolonged silence on policy matters could allow the government to shape the narrative unchallenged during its initial months in office.
The NDA leadership has dismissed Yadav’s allegations as an attempt to deflect from the opposition’s electoral setback. Leaders from the ruling alliance have said the verdict reflects public endorsement of continuity in governance and accused the RJD of undermining democratic institutions by questioning the outcome without evidence. They have also pointed to the opposition’s participation in the electoral process at every stage, including the appointment of polling agents and acceptance of counting procedures.
The episode comes at a time when debates over electoral integrity have gained prominence across the country, with opposition parties calling for greater transparency and the ruling side emphasising institutional credibility. In Bihar, where elections have historically been fiercely contested, claims of malpractice have surfaced in the past but have rarely altered outcomes unless upheld by judicial scrutiny.