The latest analysis by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch on the self-sworn affidavits of 102 re-elected Members of Parliament between the 2014 and 2024 Lok Sabha elections reveals a striking escalation in personal wealth among India’s political class. The average assets of these MPs have more than doubled in a decade, rising from ₹15.76 crore in 2014 to ₹33.13 crore in 2024, marking a 110 percent increase. This surge underscores the widening gap between political representatives and the citizens they serve, raising urgent questions about the nexus of power, privilege, and economic inequality.
The report highlights extraordinary individual gains. Shrimant Chh Udayanraje Pratapsinhamaharaj Bhonsle of the BJP tops the list with an increase of ₹162.51 crore, while Poonamben Hematbhai Maadam of the BJP recorded a 747 percent jump, from ₹17.43 crore in 2014 to ₹147.70 crore in 2024. Similarly, P V Midhun Reddy of YSRCP saw his assets rise by ₹124.25 crore, a 550 percent increase. These figures are not isolated; they reflect a broader trend across parties. The BJP, with the largest number of re-elected MPs, shows an average increase of ₹16.90 crore, while the Congress, though with fewer MPs, recorded a higher percentage growth of 135 percent. Smaller parties also reveal dramatic spikes, with the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha showing an 804 percent rise and AIMIM’s Asaduddin Owaisi reporting a 488 percent increase.
The sheer scale of asset growth raises critical concerns about transparency, accountability, and the role of money in Indian politics. While MPs are required to declare their assets, the absence of robust scrutiny mechanisms leaves voters with little clarity on the sources of such wealth accumulation. The figures suggest that political office continues to be a pathway to extraordinary financial gain, often disconnected from the economic realities of ordinary citizens. At a time when inequality remains a pressing national issue, the exponential rise in MPs’ assets risks eroding public trust in democratic institutions.
ADR’s findings are presented as a tool to inform voters, but they also serve as a stark reminder of the structural imbalance between elected representatives and the electorate. The data points to a political economy where wealth concentration among lawmakers is not only tolerated but normalized, raising the specter of a democracy increasingly shaped by affluence rather than accountability. The report compels a deeper debate on whether India’s electoral system adequately safeguards against the entrenchment of privilege, and whether voters are being represented by leaders whose financial trajectories diverge sharply from those of the people they claim to serve.

Comments