How BJP's 'saffron' show with Independent MLCs exposed NDA tensions in Bihar

The BJP’s handling of two newly elected Independent MLCs has left ally Janata Dal (United) distinctly uncomfortable. Bansidhar Brajwasi and Rahul Raj, who defeated JD(U) candidates in the October 23 elections to the Bihar legislative council, were photographed on October 31 wearing saffron scarves, in the presence of senior BJP leaders.The images prompted speculation about their political affiliation. The BJP subsequently clarified the two had merely extended support to the party and not formally joined it.The clarification, however, has done little to settle the political unease. Both men had contested as Independents and defeated candidates fielded by the JD(U), the BJP’s principal ally in Bihar. Their public association with the BJP has, therefore, raised an awkward question: how far can a constituent of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) go in cultivating political relationships with candidates who have defeated its alliance partner?The results of the eight legislative council constituencies have already altered the political conversation within the ruling coalition. The BJP and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) won two seats each while the JD(U) and Jan Suraaj Party secured one each. Two seats went to Independents. The BJP retained the Tirhut Teachers’ and Kosi Graduates’ constituencies while the JD(U) held onto Patna Graduates’. The RJD won Patna Teachers’ and Darbhanga Graduates’, and Jan Suraaj secured Darbhanga Teachers’. The two Independent victories came in Tirhut Graduates’ and Saran Teachers’.For the JD(U), the defeats in Tirhut Graduates’ and Saran Teachers’ were particularly galling. Brajwasi defeated the party’s Abhishek Jha in Tirhut Graduates’ by more than 9,000 votes, retaining the seat for a second consecutive term. In Saran Teachers’, Rahul Raj defeated JD(U) candidate Anand Pushkar by over 1,800 votes. Raj was formerly associated with the BJP but had been expelled after deciding to contest as an Independent when the seat was allotted to the JD(U).The JD(U)’s discomfort has also found expression in the public remarks of its state president Umesh Singh Kushwaha. Referring to the episode, he said: “The hallmark of the NDA is unity among constituents. All constituents should keep an eye over this.”Kushwaha stopped short of an open confrontation with the BJP, but his remarks were revealing. The appeal for alliance unity and reminder that all NDA constituents should remain watchful indicated the discomfort within the JD(U). The issue was not merely whether two Independents had extended support to the BJP; it was that both had defeated JD(U) candidates, and the BJP’s public association with them risked sending an unsettling message to its ally. The fault lines beneath the NDA’s faade of unity were evident.There are also allegations within the JD(U) that BJP leaders in the two constituencies did not campaign with the commitment expected of alliance partners, despite decisions taken at NDA meetings. Party leaders privately believe the BJP’s subsequent public association with the victors has compounded the sense of betrayal. These allegations, however, need to be assessed against the BJP’s position that the two MLCs have only extended support to it.The episode has acquired a legal dimension as well. The RJD and Jan Suraaj Party have sought the disqualification of the two MLCs, arguing that their association with the BJP amounts to a violation of the anti-defection provisions. RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav has described the developments as a mockery of the Constitution. A Jan Suraaj delegation led by Kishore Kumar Munna met legislative council chairman Ram Bachan Rai on November 2, submitted what it described as evidence, and demanded action. The Congress has also backed the demand.The legal question turns on the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. Paragraph 2(2) provides that a member elected as an Independent is liable to be disqualified if he joins a political party after the election. The provision is distinct from the rules applicable to nominated members, who have a six-month window after taking their seats to join a political party without attracting disqualification. The crucial issue, therefore, is whether the two Independents have formally joined the BJP or merely extended support to it. Photographs of them wearing saffron scarves, by themselves, do not establish party membership.The decision on any disqualification petition rests with the chairman of the legislative council, whose ruling can be subjected to judicial review. The political controversy, however, is unlikely to await a legal conclusion. Even if the two MLCs are not disqualified, the episode has exposed the delicate balance that the NDA must maintain between the ambitions of its largest constituent and the sensitivities of its allies.The BJP is the principal political force in the ruling coalition. With Samrat Choudhary occupying the chief minister’s chair, the party has an opportunity to consolidate its position in Bihar. But the JD(U), with 85 MLAs, remains indispensable to the NDA’s legislative strength. Its political relevance cannot simply be measured by its position within the coalition or by the BJP’s growing organisational footprint. The JD(U) has its own cadre, electoral constituencies and leadership interests to protect.The MLC results also offer a reminder that the BJP’s expansion cannot be pursued in isolation from the coalition arrangements that brought the NDA to power. In constituencies where the JD(U) was the official NDA nominee, the party would naturally expect its alliance partner to support its candidate. Any perception that the BJP is willing to cultivate the very candidates who defeated its ally risks weakening that understanding.The larger question is whether the BJP can continue to expand its political space in Bihar without unsettling the JD(U). The two parties may remain bound by electoral arithmetic and the advantages of government, but alliances also depend on trust, restraint and a shared understanding of political boundaries. An alliance can survive electoral setbacks; but it is harder to sustain when its partners begin to doubt whether they are playing by the same rules.Subscribe to India Today Magazine- Ends