CAG finds ₹70,877 crore in irregularities in Bihar; Tejashwi calls it Nitish–Modi theft

The CAG report on the utilisation of funds in Bihar, released ahead of the state assembly elections, has become a weapon for the opposition against the Nitish Kumar-led BJP alliance government, as it found irregularities in the utilisation of over ₹70,000 crore—an issue Bihar Leader of Opposition Tejashwi Yadav has described as a “Nitish-Modi theft” for incurring expenditure without doing any work.

The report, tabled in the state Assembly on July 24, noted that as of March 31, 2024, a total of 49,649 utilisation certificates worth ₹70,877.61 crore remained pending, indicating that funds released to various departments had not been substantiated with completion or proper usage documentation.

Although such certificates are intended to confirm the completion of projects and proper use of funds, their non-submission has left a significant portion of government spending unaudited and vulnerable to misappropriation.

According to the CAG’s State Finances Audit Report for 2023–24, the Bihar government violated Rule 271(e) of the Bihar Treasury Code by failing to submit utilisation certificates within 18 months of the financial year in which grants were released and did not comply with national accounting standards IGAS-1, IGAS-2, and IGAS-3, The Indian Express reported.

The CAG also pointed out that advances worth ₹210 crore, including temporary advances and other departmental advances, remained unadjusted, while stressing that departments like Building Construction, Public Health Engineering, Irrigation, and Road Construction had failed to settle and deposit the outstanding amounts with the treasury.

The findings have come as fresh ammunition for the Opposition, with Bihar Leader of Opposition Tejashwi Yadav alleging in a social media post that a ₹70,000 crore scam had taken place in Bihar under the Modi-Nitish government, claiming the CAG had exposed the misuse of funds, that no work had been done despite full expenditure, and that efforts to manage the situation—similar to the Srijan scam—had intensified from Delhi to Patna.

Among the departments with the largest pendency were Panchayati Raj with ₹28,154.10 crore, followed by Education, Urban Development, Rural Development, and Agriculture, which collectively contributed to the majority of unaccounted funds.

In addition to the UCs, the report revealed that Detailed Contingent (DC) bills for ₹9,205.76 crore against 22,130 Abstract Contingent (AC) bills had not been submitted, thereby breaching financial norms that require detailed documentation for every advance drawn. The state was also found to have failed in fulfilling its liability of ₹144.29 crore towards interest payments on interest-bearing deposits, while ₹53.48 crore in off-budget liabilities was not disclosed in the budget or annual financial statements.

Despite having total savings of ₹65,512.05 crore during the year, the state surrendered only ₹23,875.55 crore or 36.4%, indicating poor planning and unrealistic budget estimation. The CAG recorded that the state's liabilities rose by 12.34% during 2023–24, touching ₹3,32,740.90 crore, up from ₹2,93,307.17 crore the previous year. This included internal debt, loans from the Union government, and public account liabilities, with internal debt alone accounting for 59.26% of total liabilities.

The report observed that Bihar registered a gross fiscal deficit of ₹35,659.88 crore in 2023-24, which was ₹10,092.05 crore higher than the Budget Estimates, and the primary deficit rose to ₹18,054.08 crore, indicating that borrowing was increasingly relied upon to meet revenue shortfalls. It found that over 68% of borrowings over the past five years had been used to repay earlier debts, with only 22.40% allocated to capital expenditure and 0.58% remaining unutilised, thereby constraining the state’s ability to create productive assets.

The audit also noted the presence of ₹940.76 crore in borrowed funds within the state’s cash balance, while still resorting to ₹53.48 crore in off-budget borrowings, underlining weaknesses in fiscal discipline.