DATA OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLIES IN SIX
ZONES OF INDIA
(BASED ON THE MEMBERS WITH
DECLARED CRIMINAL CASES)
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR (2014)
Winning Candidate Constituency Party Criminal Cases
Syed Mohammad Altaf Bukhari Amirakadal JKPDP 7
Usman Abdul Majid Bandipora INC 1
Gulzar Ahmad Wani Shangus INC 1
Asiea Hazratbal JKPDP 1
Mohammad Yousuf Bhat Shopian JKPDP 1
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF HARYANA (2019)
Winning Candidate Constituency Party Criminal Cases
Sombhir Dadri IND 10
Gopal Kanda Sirsa Haryana Lokhit Party 9
Bhupinder Singh Hooda Garhi Samplakiloi INC 7
Abhay Singh Chautala Ellenabad INLD 2
Balraj Kundu Mehem IND 1
Rao Dan Singh Mahendragarh INC 1
Ram Karan Shahbad (SC) Jannayak Janta Party 1
Rakesh Janghu (Rakesh Daultabad) Badshahpur IND 1
Mamman Khan Ferozepur Jhirka INC 1
Nirmal Rani Ganaur BJP 1
Vinod Bhayana Hansi BJP 1
Pardeep Chaudhary Kalka INC 1
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF BIHAR (2020)
Winning Candidate Constituency Party Criminal Cases
Anant Kumar Singh Mokama RJD 38
Manoj Manzil Agiaon (SC) CPI (ML)(L) 30
Amarjeet Kushwaha Ziradei CPI (ML)(L) 14
Ajay Yadav Atri RJD 14
Mahboob Alam Balrampur CPI (ML)(L) 14
Rit Lal Ray Danapur RJD 14
Amrendra Kumar Pandey Kuchaikote JD (U) 11
Aniruddh Kumar Bakhtiarpur RJD 11
Tejashwi Prasad Yadav Raghopur (Vaishali) RJD 11
Raju Kumar Singh Sahebganj Vikassheel Insaan Party 10
Surendra Prasad Yadav Belaganj RJD 9
Krishan Kumar Mantoo Amnour BJP 9
Dr. Satyendra Yadav Manjhi CPI (M) 9
Satish Kumar Makhdumpur (SC) RJD 8
All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul
Akhtarul Iman Amour Muslimeen 8
Sanjay Kumar Tiwari Buxar INC 8
Bhai Virendra Maner RJD 8
COMPARISON OF THE DATA OF
MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF JAMMU &
KASHMIR WITH SIX STATES FROM
EACH ZONE OF INDIA (BASED ON
THE MEMBERS WITH DECLARED
CRIMINAL CASES)
Jammu & Kashmir:
Members with declared criminal cases: 5 (6% of the total members of the total
members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 2 (2% of the total members)
Haryana (North):
Members with declared criminal cases: 12 (13% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 7 (8% of the total members)
Bihar (East):
Members with declared criminal cases: 164 (68% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 124 (51% of the total members)
Arunachal Pradesh (North-East):
Members with declared criminal cases: 10 (17% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 8 (13% of the total members)
Chhattisgarh (Central):
Members with declared criminal cases: 17 (19% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 6 (7% of the total members)
Goa (West):
Members with declared criminal cases: 16 (40% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 13 (33% of the total members)
Telangana (South):
Members with declared criminal cases: 73 (61% of the total members)
Members with declared serious criminal cases: 47 (39% of the total members)
Comparison:
On analyzing the above data, it is found that the percentage of members facing
these charges varies significantly. Jammu & Kashmir stands out with a relatively
low percentage of only 6% of total members facing criminal charges, of which
only 2% are serious.
On the contrary, Haryana and Goa have higher proportions, with 13% and 40% of
total members facing criminal charges, respectively. However, Bihar presents the
most concerning case, with 68% of total members facing criminal charges, of
which 51% are serious.
Similarly, Arunachal Pradesh and Chhattisgarh report moderate levels of
criminalization, while Telangana shows a notable prevalence, with 61% of
members facing declared criminal cases.
COMPARISON OF THE MEMBERS
OF STATE LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLIES ON THE BASIS OF
POLITICAL PARTIES
Political Party Wise Comparison (Jammu &
Kashmir) [2014]
JKPDP INC
28%
72%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Haryana) [2019]
IND Haryana Lokhit Party INC
INLD Jannayak Janta Party BJP
10%
5%
5%
15%
60%
5%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Bihar) [2020]
RJD CPI (ML)(L) INC JD (U) All India Maljis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen BJP Others
4%
29%
40%
5%
9%
11%
3%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Goa) [2022]
INC BJP
Goa Forward Party Maharashtrawadi Gomantak
6%
6%
44%
44%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Telangana)
[2023]
BJP INC
BRS All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen
1%
TDP
3%
8%
19%
68%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Chhattisgarh)
[2023]
BJP INC
29%
71%
Political Party Wise Comparison (Arunachal
Pradesh) [2019]
INC BJP NPP IND
10% 10%
30%
50%
OVERALL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLECTED DATA
The comprehensive analysis of data is a crucial tool that provides us with a
detailed understanding of the prevalence of declared criminal cases among
members of the legislative assemblies (MLAs) in six different zones of India. Each
zone is unique and presents its own set of challenges and trends that reflect the
complex dynamics of local politics and governance.
In Jammu & Kashmir, the data reveals that 6% of the total members have declared
criminal cases, of which 2% face serious charges. The relatively lower figures
suggest a comparably cleaner political environment in the zone. On the other hand,
moving to Haryana (North), the data demonstrates that 13% of MLAs have
declared criminal cases, with 8% facing serious charges. This indicates a
concerning level of criminalization within the political sphere, which necessitates
urgent measures to enhance accountability and integrity in electoral processes.
The most alarming scenario emerges from Bihar (East), where a staggering 68% of
MLAs have declared criminal cases, with 51% facing serious charges. These
figures underscore systemic challenges, including the nexus between crime and
politics, which demand proactive reforms to safeguard democratic values and
ensure transparent governance.
In Arunachal Pradesh (North-East), Chhattisgarh (Central), and Goa (West), the
prevalence of declared criminal cases varies. Arunachal Pradesh reports 17% of
MLAs with criminal cases and 13% with serious charges, indicating a moderate yet
discernible issue. Chhattisgarh exhibits a similar trend, with 19% of MLAs having
declared criminal cases but with a relatively lower serious charge rate of 7%.
Conversely, Goa presents higher percentages, with 40% of MLAs facing criminal
cases and 33% facing serious charges, indicating significant challenges in
maintaining political probity. The data of Telangana (South) unveils substantial
concerns, as 61% of MLAs have declared criminal cases, of which 39% are serious
charges. This zone, too, presents a worrying trend of criminalization in politics that
demands immediate attention.
In conclusion, the detailed analysis underscores the urgency of addressing the
complex interplay between crime and politics across different regions. It highlights
the need for robust legal frameworks, transparent electoral processes, and proactive
measures to combat criminalization and uphold democratic principles. Only
through concerted efforts can India ensure the integrity of its legislative institutions
and strengthen democratic governance at all levels.
