On March 4, 2025, the Bihar Legislative Assembly became the stage for a dramatic showdown between two of the state’s most prominent political figures: Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and Leader of the Opposition Tejashwi Yadav. The exchange, marked by sharp words and personal jabs, underscored the deep-seated rivalry between the two leaders and their respective parties—the Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)) and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD)—as Bihar gears up for its next assembly elections later in the year. At the heart of the confrontation was Nitish Kumar’s bold claim: “It was me who made your father what he became,” a stinging retort to Tejashwi Yadav’s criticisms of the current government’s performance. This statement not only reignited a decades-long political saga but also highlighted the complex interplay of mentorship, rivalry, and legacy that defines Bihar’s political landscape.
The Context: A Budget Session Turns Personal
The confrontation unfolded during the ongoing budget session of the Bihar Assembly, a critical moment as the state government, led by Nitish Kumar and his National Democratic Alliance (NDA) allies, presented a Rs 3.17 lakh crore budget for the 2025-26 financial year. This budget, unveiled on March 3, 2025, by Deputy Chief Minister Samrat Choudhary, marked a 13.6% increase from the previous year’s allocation and was the last major fiscal plan before the state heads into elections. For the ruling coalition, it was an opportunity to showcase its achievements and bolster its electoral prospects. For the opposition, led by Tejashwi Yadav, it was a chance to expose what they saw as missed opportunities and unfulfilled promises.
The debate began with Tejashwi Yadav taking the floor, delivering a scathing critique of Nitish Kumar’s governance. He sarcastically remarked that the world seemed to have begun in 2005—the year Nitish first became Chief Minister—dismissing the contributions of the RJD-led governments under his father, Lalu Prasad Yadav, and mother, Rabri Devi, before that time. Tejashwi accused the NDA of destroying democracy and failing to deliver on pro-people measures like a Rs 2,500 monthly stipend for women and 200 units of free electricity. His fiery rhetoric painted Nitish as a tired leader presiding over a crumbling system, a charge that clearly struck a nerve.
Nitish Kumar, never one to shy away from a verbal sparring match, rose to defend his record. What followed was a heated exchange that veered into deeply personal territory. “What was there in Bihar earlier? It was me who made your father what he became,” Nitish declared, pointing directly at Tejashwi. “Even the people from your caste were asking me why I was doing this, but I still supported him.” The remark was a direct reference to Lalu Prasad Yadav, Tejashwi’s father and the RJD supremo, whose political rise in the 1980s and 1990s owed much to the broader socialist movement in which Nitish himself had played a key role.
A Historical Flashback: Nitish and Lalu’s Shared Past
To understand the weight of Nitish’s claim, one must rewind to the turbulent political currents of Bihar in the late 20th century. Both Nitish Kumar and Lalu Prasad Yadav emerged as protégés of the socialist movement led by Jayaprakash Narayan in the 1970s, a period of intense agitation against the Congress-led central government. This movement gave birth to the Janata Dal, a coalition of anti-Congress forces that included both leaders. Nitish, an engineer-turned-politician from the Kurmi community, and Lalu, a charismatic Yadav leader representing the state’s sizable Other Backward Classes (OBCs), were allies in this struggle.
In the 1980s, following the death of OBC stalwart Karpoori Thakur, Lalu rose to prominence within the Janata Dal, eventually becoming the leader of the opposition in the Bihar Assembly. Nitish, a senior figure in the party, supported Lalu’s ascent, seeing him as a potent force to consolidate the backward caste vote bank. When Lalu became Chief Minister in 1990, it marked the beginning of a transformative yet controversial era in Bihar’s politics. Lalu’s tenure, often dubbed the “Jungle Raj” by critics, was characterized by populist measures like implementing the Mandal Commission recommendations, which expanded reservations for OBCs, but also by allegations of rampant corruption and lawlessness.
Nitish’s claim that he “made” Lalu reflects his role as a key supporter during those early years. However, their alliance was short-lived. By 1994, ideological differences and personal ambitions drove a wedge between them. Nitish broke away to form the Samata Party (later merged into JD(U)), positioning himself as a counterweight to Lalu’s dominance. When Nitish finally ousted Lalu’s RJD in 2005, partnering with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), he framed his victory as a restoration of order and development—a narrative he has clung to ever since.
The Present Clash: Legacy vs. Progress
Fast forward to 2025, and the dynamics have shifted dramatically. Lalu, now 76 and battling health issues, has largely ceded the RJD’s leadership to his son Tejashwi, a 35-year-old former cricketer turned politician. Nitish, at 73, remains the undisputed face of the JD(U) and the NDA in Bihar, despite his frequent alliance switches—most recently rejoining the BJP-led coalition in January 2024 after a brief stint with the RJD-led Mahagathbandhan. The March 4 clash in the assembly was not just a policy debate but a collision of legacies: Nitish’s assertion of his transformative governance since 2005 versus Tejashwi’s defense of his family’s contributions to Bihar’s social fabric.
Nitish’s retort was layered with both pride and condescension. By claiming credit for Lalu’s rise, he sought to diminish Tejashwi’s credibility, portraying him as a beneficiary of a legacy he himself had helped craft. “You don’t know anything,” Nitish added, accusing Tejashwi of ignorance about Bihar’s history and his father’s resistance to policies like the separation of Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs) from Backward Classes—a reform Nitish championed. The Chief Minister painted a grim picture of pre-2005 Bihar: a state where people feared stepping out after dusk, roads were nonexistent, and communal tensions flared. In contrast, he touted his achievements—improved security, infrastructure growth, and social harmony—as evidence of his superior leadership.
Tejashwi, however, was unrelenting. Earlier in the session, he had mocked Nitish’s narrative, questioning whether Bihar was “non-existent” before 2005. He highlighted Lalu’s role in empowering the poor and marginalized, arguing that his father’s policies gave dignity to communities long ignored by the elite. Tejashwi’s interruptions during Nitish’s speech—prompting the “I made your father” jab—reflected his determination to challenge the Chief Minister’s monopoly on Bihar’s development story.
Caste, Power, and Personal Barbs
Nitish’s remark about “people from your caste” questioning his support for Lalu added a layer of complexity to the exchange. Bihar’s politics is deeply rooted in caste identities, with the Yadavs (a dominant OBC group) forming the backbone of the RJD’s support base, while Nitish’s JD(U) relies on a coalition of Kurmis, Koeris, and Extremely Backward Classes (EBCs). By suggesting that even Yadavs were skeptical of Lalu, Nitish aimed to undermine Tejashwi’s claim to caste-based legitimacy. It was a strategic jab, implying that Lalu’s leadership was divisive even within his own community—a charge that resonates with Nitish’s broader critique of the RJD as a party of nepotism and exclusion.
Tejashwi, for his part, has sought to broaden the RJD’s appeal beyond its traditional Yadav-Muslim base, emphasizing economic issues like unemployment and poverty. His interruptions in the Assembly were not just a defense of his father but a bid to assert his own authority as a leader capable of challenging Nitish’s dominance. Yet, Nitish’s response—”You don’t know anything”—dismissed Tejashwi as an inexperienced upstart, a “child” unfit to grasp the nuances of Bihar’s political history. The paternalistic tone was deliberate, reinforcing Nitish’s image as the elder statesman who has seen and shaped it all.
Conclusion
The March 4, 2025, clash between Nitish Kumar and Tejashwi Yadav was more than a momentary flare-up—it was a distillation of Bihar’s political soul. Nitish’s claim that he “made” Lalu was a masterstroke of historical revisionism, designed to assert his primacy over the Yadav dynasty while reminding voters of his role in ending the so-called “jungle raj.” Tejashwi’s defiance, rooted in a defense of his father’s legacy and a vision for the future, signaled his determination to step out of Lalu’s shadow and challenge Nitish’s narrative of singular transformation.
As Bihar heads toward the polls, this exchange will linger in the public imagination, framing the contest as a battle between experience and youth, continuity and change, and two rival versions of the state’s past. Whether Nitish’s gambit strengthens his hold or fuels Tejashwi’s rise remains to be seen. For now, the Assembly spat stands as a testament to the enduring power of history—and its contentious retelling—in shaping Bihar’s political destiny.
