By Sami Ahmad, TwoCircles.net
Patna: As Bihar heads toward the 2025 Assembly elections, the Muslim community, which makes up 17.7 percent of the state’s population, stands at a political crossroads. With 243 seats in the Assembly and two competing alliances, the opposition Grand Alliance (Mahagathbandhan) and the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA), Muslims face a familiar dilemma: how to balance the demand for fair representation with the pressing need to resist Hindutva’s advance.
Despite their decisive presence in several constituencies, Muslims remain underrepresented in the lists released by major parties. The question reverberates across political discussions and drawing rooms alike: should Muslims continue backing secular parties that promise protection but deliver limited representation, or assert themselves politically even at the risk of division?
Uneven Representation in the Grand Alliance
The Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), led by Lalu Prasad Yadav and his son Tejashwi, has long been the principal political home for Bihar’s Muslims. Yet when the RJD announced its list of 143 candidates, only 18 were Muslim, about 12.6 percent. Proportionally, that share should have been closer to 41 seats. Critics say the shortfall reflects a conscious underallocation that leaves Muslims with less than half their demographic due.
The dissatisfaction goes beyond numbers. Several sitting Muslim MLAs were denied tickets, while others had their constituencies changed. Within the RJD, many allege that the Yadav community, roughly 14 percent of the population, continues to dominate decision-making. “Muslim voices are either ignored or inadequately represented,” says a senior RJD functionary requesting anonymity.
The Congress, which received 61 seats within the Grand Alliance, has fielded 10 Muslim candidates, or 16.7 per cent. Its relatively higher share has drawn some praise, but the denial of tickets to a few incumbents has still sparked local resentment. Meanwhile, Mukesh Sahni’s Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP), another ally, did not nominate a single Muslim candidate, further fueling criticism that alliance arithmetic trumps inclusion.
The Left parties, traditionally supported by sections of Muslim voters, offered little comfort. The CPI(ML), contesting under the Grand Alliance banner, fielded only two Muslim candidates, while other communist factions fielded none. Altogether, the Grand Alliance has fielded 30 Muslim candidates across 243 seats, about 11.9 percent of the total, well below population parity.
“Better Than NDA, But Still Inadequate”
Professor Pushpendra, former director at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, notes that while the RJD has fared better than NDA constituents, its distribution still falls short. “RJD has under allocated by roughly five percentage points compared with the Muslim population,” he says. “When 37 percent of RJD tickets go to Yadavs, the imbalance within the Muslim Yadav equation becomes evident.”
He points out that RJD is squeezed between rivals. On one side is the NDA, and on the other, smaller challengers like Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party and Asaduddin Owaisi’s AIMIM. The Jan Suraaj Party fielded around 30 Muslim candidates, more than RJD in absolute numbers, while AIMIM campaigns almost entirely on Muslim representation. “They accuse RJD of exploiting Muslims’ fear of BJP’s return to power to justify underrepresentation,” Pushpendra observes.
NDA’s Calculated Distance
The NDA’s approach offers a stark contrast. Out of 243 seats, it has fielded just five Muslim candidates: four by Nitish Kumar’s Janata Dal (United) and one by Chirag Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas). The BJP, contesting 101 seats, has none.
“The BJP does not hide its Hindutva politics or its hostility towards Muslims,” says Professor Pushpendra. “But its allies’ tokenism, four and one seat each, shows how deeply they have aligned with the BJP’s ideological position.”
Nitish Kumar, once credited with welfare measures that earned him goodwill among Muslims, has seen his credibility decline. His support for the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Citizenship Amendment Act, along with a JDU MP’s remark that the party would not work for Muslims since they ‘don’t vote for us,’ has further eroded trust. In the 2020 elections, JDU fielded 11 Muslim candidates, none of whom won. With just four tickets this time, it appears to have written off the Muslim vote.
A Strategic Dilemma
For many Muslims, the electoral question is no longer just about representation but survival. Voting strategically for the Grand Alliance may help block Hindutva’s consolidation, but it also means tolerating marginalization within secular politics. Demanding greater representation, on the other hand, risks splitting the opposition vote — an outcome that could strengthen the NDA.
This tension reflects the community’s long-standing paradox: overwhelming loyalty to secular parties without corresponding political agency. “If proportional representation were applied strictly,” notes one Patna based analyst, “Tejashwi Yadav, whose community is smaller than Muslims, would have no claim to the chief minister’s post.” The remark underscores the gap between demographic weight and political power in Bihar’s caste driven system.
Balancing Act and Political Calculations
The RJD defends its ticket distribution as a delicate balancing act. Fielding too many Muslim candidates, party strategists argue, risks provoking BJP accusations of Muslim appeasement, which could alienate Hindu voters, particularly among the Extremely Backward Classes (EBC) and Other Backward Classes (OBC). To maintain both secular credentials and broader caste coalitions, the RJD treads a careful line.
This balancing act, however, leaves many Muslims frustrated. Some intellectuals and BJP sympathizers claim that secular parties use the BJP bogeyman to secure Muslim votes while offering little political space in return. Others argue that in a majoritarian climate, Muslims have few viable options beyond strategic alliances with imperfect secular partners.
A Pivotal Election
The 2025 Bihar elections could reshape Muslim political engagement in the state. With AIMIM excluded from mainstream alliances and Jan Suraj emerging as a wildcard, the community’s bargaining power remains tied to the Grand Alliance, despite its flaws. Whether Muslims choose pragmatic consolidation behind the RJD Congress combine or express discontent through abstention or alternative options will significantly influence both results and the future of minority politics in Bihar.
In a state where caste, religion, and power intersect sharply, this decision carries existential weight. Should Muslims accept strategic subordination to defeat Hindutva, or insist on dignity even at the risk of division? The ballot will once again be their only voice, but this time, the stakes are higher than ever.
The Identity Politics Trap
Professor Mohammad Sajjad of the History Department calls this situation an identity politics trap. He explains, “Anti Muslim hatred and Hindu consolidation are both symptoms of identity politics. Unfortunately, even RJD cannot ensure Yadav votes transfer to Muslim candidates.”
He believes that ordinary Muslims, unlike aspiring legislators, face an impossible choice. “They either focus on defeating saffron regression to avoid Yogi or Hemanta style repression, regardless of underrepresentation, or they assert for representation and risk letting saffron allies win. In both cases, the choice is restrictive.”
He concludes, “The poison of majoritarianism leaves little room for minorities. Only in a non-majoritarian social and political environment can minorities negotiate with other communities, castes, and the government.”
Professor Pushpendra agrees that representation and protection are not opposing concerns but mutually reinforcing. Reflecting on the 2020 elections, he says, “When AIMIM won five seats in Seemanchal, it showed Muslims’ desire for agency. Even pragmatically, RJD could have done more to counter these spoilers and reassure its Muslim supporters.”