After Rs 1,100 Pension And 35% Job Quota For Women, What Is In Nitish's 'Election Box'?
All eyes are on the Bihar cabinet meeting scheduled for 10:30 am on Tuesday, July 15, where Chief Minister Nitish Kumar is expected to clear a slate of welfare initiatives with potential election overtones. With the 2025 assembly elections drawing closer and opposition pressure mounting, this cabinet session could shape the government's final leg before the polls.
Sources in the state secretariat say the agenda includes expanding flagship schemes, sharpening the government's stance on the reservation issue, and rolling out fresh benefits for the youth, elderly, women, and farmers.
Pension Push Likely to Get Louder
The old age pension scheme, recently revised to provide Rs 1,100 per month to over 1.09 crore elderly, widows, and disabled citizens, is likely to feature prominently. Though the increase (up from Rs 400) came into effect this July, the opposition, particularly the RJD, has slammed it as inadequate. Their demand is Rs 1,500 per month.
With this criticism in play, the cabinet could either further hike the amount or expand the beneficiary pool. Government insiders hint that a recalibration of the scheme is on the table, both as a welfare move and a political counter.
Reservation Strategy Under Review
Reservation continues to be a politically charged issue in Bihar. The cabinet is expected to review the legal status of the 65% reservation bill, which was recently struck down by the Patna High Court. The state government has already moved the Supreme Court to challenge the verdict.
Tuesday's meeting may formalise Bihar's legal roadmap ahead. Alongside, the government may also push forward the implementation of 35% reservation in state jobs for women domiciled in Bihar, a measure Nitish Kumar has publicly backed, and one likely to resonate with the nearly 3.6 crore women voters in the state.
What's in the 'Election Box'?
With elections less than a year away, the Nitish government is expected to announce a range of voter-friendly initiatives. Likely areas of focus:
1. Youth and Jobs
The Bihar Youth Commission, already cleared by the cabinet, could get fresh funds or programmes. Under the 'Mukhyamantri Pratigya Yojana', proposals may include monthly assistance of Rs 4,000 for Class 12 students and Rs 6,000 for graduates enrolled in skill development or internship programs.
2. Farmers
Agricultural support schemes could get a boost. In recent meetings, the cabinet had approved diesel subsidies and roadmap funds. Tuesday's discussion may include incentives for new crop cultivation, irrigation systems, or agri-tech support.
3. Women's Welfare
Expect expansion of schemes like the Pink Bus Service, Didi Ki Rasoi, and Mahila Haat. These initiatives are part of the state's broader push for women's empowerment, especially as female voter turnout has been rising.
4. Education and Health
The government may clear fresh teacher and headmaster appointments. In healthcare, expect budgetary approvals for new district-level facilities and mobile medical units, as part of Nitish Kumar's social development pitch.
Why This Meeting Matters
Today's cabinet session is more than routine governance; it's a crucial pre-election staging ground. With opposition parties sharpening their attacks and BJP watching closely as a key NDA ally, Nitish Kumar is walking a tightrope. The focus now is on delivering visible benefits and reinforcing the state's welfare image.
view comments
First Published:
July 15, 2025, 11:05 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
4 minutes ago
- Mint
Amid Trump administration's crackdown on immigrants, US deports five 'barbaric' criminals to small African nation
The Donald Trump administration deported five men convicted of violent crimes to Eswatini, a tiny African kingdom, on Tuesday. The deportees – from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba, and Yemen – included murderers and child rapists whose home countries refused to take them back. Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called them 'uniquely barbaric' criminals now 'off American soil'. The flight followed a recent Supreme Court ruling allowing deportations to countries where migrants have no ties. New immigration rules let officials deport people with just 6 hours' notice in emergencies. Eswatini (formerly Swaziland) – a nation smaller than New Jersey with 1.2 million people – hasn't explained its agreement to accept the deportees. Ruled by King Mswati III since 1986, it's Africa's last absolute monarchy and bans political parties. Pro-democracy groups protested the secrecy, with SWALIMO spokesperson Ingiphile Dlamini stating: 'There's been no official communication about this deal' . Critics worry the poor country can't safely manage violent criminals and note its history of human rights abuses, including torturing detainees. This marks the second African deportation this month; eight men were sent to war-torn South Sudan earlier. The Trump administration is actively seeking similar deals with Rwanda, Angola, and other African nations. While West African leaders discussed accepting deportees during recent White House visits, Nigeria publicly refused, calling it unacceptable. The U.S. has also sent hundreds of Venezuelans to Central American prisons, but Africa is now a focus for 'third-country' removals. Analysts suggest poor nations may agree in exchange for U.S. aid or trade benefits. UN experts and lawyers argue the policy violates international law by sending people to countries where they risk torture. Justice Sonia Sotomayor previously criticized similar deportations, warning migrants could face torture or death. Under the new rules, U.S. officials aren't required to ask if deportees fear persecution in the third country. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the practice, claiming partner nations will 'take care of them'. However, South Sudan still hasn't revealed the whereabouts of the eight men it received.
Indian Express
7 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why the SC has made secretly recorded conversations between spouses in court
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that secretly recorded conversations between spouses are admissible evidence in matrimonial disputes, including divorce proceedings. It set aside a 2021 Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment which had barred a husband, who sought a divorce, from using secretly recorded phone conversations with his wife as evidence in court. The apex court's ruling changes the contours of spousal or marital privilege in Indian law, which protects private conversations between a husband and a wife during their marriage, and even after the marriage has ended. Spousal privilege means that a person cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse in a criminal case. It is rooted in the idea that a degree of protection has to be provided to private conversations between a husband and a wife during their marriage. In India, Section 122 of the Evidence Act codifies this. It states: 'No person who is or has been married, shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall he be permitted to disclose any such communication, unless the person who made it, or his representative-in-interest, consents, except in suits between married persons, or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime committed against the other.' Spousal communication is allowed as evidence, according to the law, when the other spouse consents or when one spouse has narrated the events to a third party who testifies in a court. Otherwise, even if a spouse accidentally spills the beans, it is struck off the record as inadmissible evidence that the court cannot rely upon. Spousal privilege does not apply directly in divorce cases where one spouse makes allegations against the other spouse and testifies in a court of law. These allegations are supplemented by evidence such as letters, photographs or testimonies of other people. However, with technological advances, text messages, video and voice recordings, emails are often presented as evidence. Many High Courts have refrained from accepting secret recordings as evidence due to two main reasons: The SC's ruling relied on its 1973 judgment in a case, which pertained to a telephonic conversation recorded by the police to prove a bribery charge against a doctor. At the time, the apex court overlooked how the evidence was obtained, given that the case involved corruption by a public servant and the phone tap was by the state. The SC has now effectively extended this reasoning to matrimonial cases. The court has said that if evidence is relevant, independently verifiable, and falls within statutory exceptions, it can be admitted even if collected in secret. It has also been said that secret recordings are a violation of fundamental rights, but the right to privacy has to be balanced with the right to a fair trial. The SC has interpreted Section 122 to mean that while an individual cannot be compelled to testify against their spouse, it is not impermissible to allow evidence to that effect, especially in matrimonial disputes. The ruling says a telephone that secretly records conversations is 'no different from an eavesdropper.' Simply put, the court here is equating digital evidence to a third party who is a witness to a privileged conversation and is testifying. The SC recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right in 2017. The current ruling is an example of how the court operationalises this right to privacy. The court, in its interpretation of Section 122, said that the provision was drafted into 'sanctity of the marriage' and not to protect privacy within marriage. This is perhaps true for a law of the Victorian era — the Evidence Act came into force in 1872. But privacy as a is now a fundamental right, which protects the inner sphere of the individual from interference from both state and non-state actors. Any infringement of the right to privacy has to be backed by a valid law. The SC also disagreed with the argument that making secret recordings admissible in court would lead to surveillance within marriage. It said, 'If the marriage has reached a stage where spouses are actively snooping on each other, that is in itself a symptom of a broken relationship and denotes a lack of trust between them.' There is also a concern that the ruling could affect women's right to a fair trial, as there is a huge gender gap in smartphone ownership and access to technology in India. There is a 39% divide in ownership of smartphones by women compared to men in the country, according to the Mobile Gender Gap Report 2025. When evidence can be collected at the click of a button, the party with easier access to such technology naturally gets the upper hand.
Time of India
7 minutes ago
- Time of India
Prashant Kishor ‘exposes' Tejashwi, Rahul Gandhi's ‘unfulfilled' promises ahead of Bihar polls
In Bihar Badlav Rally, Jan Suraaj Party chief Prashant Kishor slammed Bihar's Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and dared LoP Tejashwi Yadav to reveal the names and numbers of jobs. Jan Suraj Party founder Prashant Kishor said, "Who stopped him (Bihar CM Nitish Kumar) from providing employment for 20 years? Nitish Kumar will provide one crore jobs in the next 5 years. After ruining Bihar for 20 years, if he still isn't satisfied, he needs five more years to ruin it Yadav should release the names and numbers of those who got jobs in 17 months through RJD. Show more Show less
