The rhetoric of “Jungle Raj” has taken center stage in the run-up to the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections. In rally after rally, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has made the term “Jungle Raj” the central rhetorical anchor of the National Democratic Alliance’s (NDA) campaign.
This phrase, originally coined to describe the period of perceived lawlessness and administrative collapse during the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) rule (1990–2005), is employed not merely as a historical reference but as a potent political weapon to frame the choice before the electorate. The strategy is clear: to leverage voter memory and fear of regression against the RJD-led Mahagathbandhan. The opposition Mahagathbandhan (Grand Alliance), on the other hand, has strategically inverted this narrative. RJD and its allies, led by Tejashwi Yadav, now use the term, or similar evocative language like “Crime Capital,” to describe the current law and order situation under the long-standing administration of Nitish Kumar (largely in alliance with the BJP).
The term “Jungle Raj” itself actually originated from an oral observation by the Patna High Court, which, in 1997, while hearing a contempt petition concerning poor civic management (specifically severe waterlogging and poor drainage in Patna), remarked that the situation was “worse than the Jungle Raj” and indicated that there was no Government worth the name.
The political opposition quickly seized upon this judicial observation and the phrase “Jungle Raj” became a powerful political slogan associated with the alleged breakdown of law and order and criminality during the RJD’s tenure (1990–2005). The 1997 comment was a direct critique of administrative failure on civic issues. Similarly, in August 2002, the Patna High Court stated that “Jungle Raj” prevailed in the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) due to a lack of democratic norms and vacancies, highlighting issues of administrative integrity.
Reports suggest that from 1997 to 2004, the Patna High Court was recognised for its judicial activism in promoting good governance. This included directing that jailed criminals be banned from contesting elections (2000-2003) and issuing categorical rulings that sent powerful criminals back to prisons from hospitals (1998-2001).
Besides, the High Court had taken suo motu cognisance of the deteriorating education system in 2002 and orders were passed in 2003-04 for enforcing educational infrastructure and judicial pressure on the State’s prison system regarding the continued operation of criminal syndicates from inside jails.
The year 1990 to 2005 in Bihar also witnessed Large-Scale Caste Massacres, Organised Crime and Kidnapping Industry, Terror of Mafia Dons, High-Profile Criminal Cases, Large-Scale Corruption Cases including Fodder Scam (Chara Ghotala) and therefore the phrase “Jungle Raj” became synonymous to denote a complete breakdown of law and order, systemic state failure and a prevalence of criminal anarchy over democratic governance during the 15-year rule of RJD, under Lalu Prasad and his wife Rabri Devi.
Judicial interventions were taking place and directives were passed. These actions collectively served to keep the concept of Sushasan (good governance) alive in the public discourse and directly laid the groundwork for the 2005 political shift, as the judiciary effectively exposed the extent of state failure, making the public receptive to a change of governance.
A regime change in November 2005 brought Nitish Kumar to the helm of affairs. While his Government is often credited with improving the law-and-order situation post-2005, the opposition claims that the much-talked “Sushasan” (Good Governance) under him has cracked, especially during the later phases of NDA rule. Opposition leaders repeatedly cite a series of high-profile incidents to demonstrate the failure of the state and repurposed the phrase “Jungle Raj” to attack the current NDA regime, especially Nitish Kumar’s long tenure since 2005.
The recurring crime categories that have drawn significant public and political attention during the 2005-2025 period include High-Profile Murders involving traders/Businessmen allegedly for ransom or due to disputes, continued Influence of ‘Baahubalis’ (Strongman) and critics argue that official crime data, particularly the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, shows a significant increase in certain heinous crimes over the past two decades, with the state allegedly ranking high nationally in categories like Murders and Crimes Against Women.
Srijan Scam (2017 onwards), which is a major financial scam involving the fraudulent transfer of government funds (allegedly over `1000 crore) from various Government departments to the accounts of a Bhagalpur-based NGO named Srijan Mahila Vikas Sahyog Samiti, exposed systemic failure in treasury management.
The Prohibition-Related Corruption, i.e., the failure to effectively implement the complete liquor ban and the subsequent widespread reports of illegal liquor trade, corruption and a massive strain on the police force, are often cited as signs of administrative failure and a new form of organised crime.
The issues concerning the Srijan Scam and the Prohibition Law of 2016 have been dealt with by both the Patna High Court and the Supreme Court over the years and in both matters, critical judicial remarks have been made, giving opportunity to the political opponents to counter the narrative of Jungle Raj of 1990-2005.
At this stage, it becomes important to examine how the rhetoric of “Jungle Raj” has taken center stage in the run-up to the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections.
While the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) campaign for the ensuing Assembly polls uses “Jungle Raj” to describe the RJD’s past, the opposition Mahagathbandhan (led by RJD and supported by allies like Congress) has increasingly repurposed the term to attack the current NDA regime, especially Nitish Kumar’s long tenure since 2005. In simple terms, Rampant Kidnapping and Extortion, Caste-Based Violence and Impunity, Governance Collapse characterised the Jungle Raj, and now the opposition’s counter-rhetoric centers on the arguments of recent spikes in heinous crimes, targeted killings, crimes against vulnerable Groups and mafia dominance in the State.
In comparison, Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party’s (JSP) stance on the “Jungle Raj” issue is highly nuanced, acting as a calculated attack on both the RJD-led Mahagathbandhan and the incumbent NDA. Jan Suraaj uses the “Jungle Raj” legacy to attack the RJD and also accuses the NDA of presiding over a different, but equally destructive, form of misgovernance — one characterised by systemic corruption and administrative collapse.
Undeterred by the narratives of the opposition on the current law and order situation, the Prime Minister’s attacks are multi-pronged, connecting lawlessness, corruption and dynastic politics under the umbrella of “Jungle Raj”. In rallies across the state, his message is consistently focused on preventing the return of this era, frequently encapsulated in the slogan: “Phir ek baar sushasan sarkar; jungle raj waalon ko door rakhega Bihar” (Once again, a good governance Government; Bihar will keep those of Jungle Raj away). This establishes a binary choice: Sushasan (Good Governance) vs. Jungle Raj (Anarchy).
Modi uses historical allegations to paint a dire picture of the RJD’s past rule. He repeatedly invokes the historical narrative of rampant kidnapping for ransom, extortion and systemic lawlessness, alleging that police stations were inaccessible to the Dalits and the poor.
Critically, he urges young voters who did not experience the RJD rule firsthand to talk to their elders and learn about the “atrocities of Jungle Raj,” ensuring that this historical trauma is passed down and factored into the current vote.
In his rallies, Modi utilised specific, high-profile cases from the 1990–2005 period to vividly illustrate the breakdown of law and order. Among others, he talked about the Champa Biswas Case (1998 Dalit IAS Officer’s Wife Rape Case), the kidnapping and killing of innocent people, etc.
Modi emphasised the economic impact of the “Jungle Raj,” stating that while Bihar once had many factories, the lawlessness caused them to shut down. He links law and order directly to economic despair and migration, arguing that fear of crime was a major roadblock to development and investment.
In contrast, by focusing on contemporary crime, the opposition aims to neutralise the NDA’s primary political asset: Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s reputation as the “Sushasan Babu.” Tejashwi Yadav and other Mahagathbandhan leaders assert that the Chief Minister has either become “weak and unconcerned” or is “busy saving his seat” rather than governing. The Congress party went a step further by labelling the state under Kumar’s leadership as a “university of crime,” implying that the administration is actively nurturing lawlessness rather than containing it.
Crucially, the opposition attempts to shift the electoral focus away from the historical “Jungle Raj” (1990-2005) and towards the present-day crime graph. They argue that two decades of “Sushasan” have not been enough and voters must look at the immediate crisis rather than a distant past. This strategy is specifically aimed at younger voters who did not experience the RJD’s earlier rule.
Prashant Kishor frequently uses the “Jungle Raj” term to directly criticise the RJD and its Chief Ministerial candidate, Tejashwi Yadav. He has openly stated that if the RJD were to return to power, it would mean the return of “Lalu Yadav’s ‘Jungle Raj’.” This is a clear attempt to remind voters, especially the older electorate, of the lawlessness associated with the 1990-2005 period, aligning with the NDA’s traditional attack line.
While Jan Suraaj acknowledges the past violence and chaos under RJD, his major criticism of the current situation, run by the NDA (Nitish Kumar/BJP), centres on corruption and failed governance (often termed Kushasan or bad governance), rather than just crime. He has publicly stated that while crime and violence were higher during Lalu Yadav’s tenure, the current Government is the most corrupt in Bihar’s history, claiming the level of “loot and corruption in Government machinery today is unprecedented.” This strategy reframes the choice for voters: not just past anarchy vs. present order, but past anarchy vs. present decay and institutional failure.
In this environment of political expediency and narrative warfare, the historical role of the judiciary — which originally coined the phrase “Jungle Raj” as a direct critique of state failure and later acted to counter criminality and administrative collapse — becomes an imperative. Only through renewed, assertive judicial intervention can the discourse be anchored back to objective constitutional and administrative standards.