As a third LJP (RV) legislator lands in row, Chirag says ‘would want probe’

In less than a month, three legislators of the Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) have found themselves at the centre of controversies. The latest instance pertains to an MLA and a minister in the Bihar government who has been accused by Janshakti Janta Dal leader Tej Pratap Yadav of “indecent behaviour” with a woman at a hotel in Delhi.

This comes at a time when another MLA of the LJP (RV), Amit Kumar Ranu, has been named in 10 FIRs in an alleged land grab case in Muzaffarpur. Before that, in early August, the wife of an official allegedly killed by his driver had accused Dehri MLA Sonu Singh of involvement in the case.

Speaking to reporters at Patna airport, Paswan said he has always refrained from commenting on allegations against anyone without first having the facts right. “Whenever allegations are made… there should certainly be an investigation.

I have never commented against anyone without facts,” Paswan said, without naming the MLA. Following the allegations by Yadav, the MLA concerned had sent him a legal notice, seeking Rs 50 crore in damages over alleged defamatory social media posts.

The notice stated that “false and defamatory allegations” had been published and circulated against him on social media and other public platforms. Commenting on the case, Paswan said the matter had become more serious because “the woman concerned has herself come forward and presented her side of the matter” before everyone.

Paswan, however, stressed that such matters should be viewed independent of political differences and should not be turned into political controversies. “Such matters should rise above political differences. These can fall within the ambit of personal defamation.

Therefore, everyone’s dignity and honour, whether a woman or a man, must also be respected,” he said. Earlier this week, Yadav had written in a post on X that a woman had been subjected to inappropriate behaviour at a Delhi hotel by the Bihar minister, claiming that the matter was subsequently sought to be settled through an alleged payment of around Rs 25 lakh.

Paswan, meanwhile, urged leaders to refrain from making political remarks until the facts of the matter are established and placed before the public. “Political comments should be avoided. The correct information should first come before the public, and only after that should anyone get involved in the matter.

Therefore, I would want an investigation into this,” Paswan said. The LJP (RV) chief, meanwhile, took stock of the flood situation in his Lok Sabha constituency of Hajipur. During his visit, he also attended a felicitation ceremony organised for newly appointed Bihar state president Surendra Vivek at the party’s office in Patna.

The controversy comes days after LJP (RV)'s Belsand MLA Ranu found himself named in around 10 FIRs in a widening investigation, involving allegations of forcible demolition and forging of land records in Muzaffarpur. While Ranu has denied the allegations, police have claimed to have found evidence against the MLA.

Ranu claimed that though police searched his residence, they did not find any incriminating material against him. He further said the land at the centre of the dispute did not even belong to him or his family. Ranu alleged that the disputed land belonged to the kin of a party member, Sumit Srivastava, who had approached the police repeatedly with documents, claiming that others were carrying out illegal construction on the property.

“Police had, instead, registered a case against him (Srivastava) and arrested him,” said the MLA. Before that, on August 2, the wife of the Executive Officer of the Dehri-Dalmianagar Municipal Council, Vimal Kumar, who was allegedly killed by his driver, had accused the local MLA, Sonu Singh, of demanding Rs 50 lakh from her husband.

She claimed the driver acted in connivance with the MLA. Seizing upon the issue, Rashtriya Janata Dal leader (RJD) and Tej Pratap's brother Tejashwi Yadav had demanded that the MLA be named in the FIR and a judicial inquiry ordered.