Civic polls: SEC bars govt from paying Jan aid in advance to Ladki Bahin Yojana beneficiaries

By IANS | Updated: January 12, 2026 19:15 IST2026-01-12T19:13:51+5:302026-01-12T19:15:08+5:30

Mumbai, Jan 12 The Maharashtra State Election Commission (SEC) on Monday barred the Mahayuti government from depositing an ...

Civic polls: SEC bars govt from paying Jan aid in advance to Ladki Bahin Yojana beneficiaries | Civic polls: SEC bars govt from paying Jan aid in advance to Ladki Bahin Yojana beneficiaries

Civic polls: SEC bars govt from paying Jan aid in advance to Ladki Bahin Yojana beneficiaries

Mumbai, Jan 12 The Maharashtra State Election Commission (SEC) on Monday barred the Mahayuti government from depositing an advance instalment of Rs 1,500 for January along with the December 2025 assistance into the accounts of eligible beneficiaries of the Ladki Bahin Yojana ahead of Makar Sankranti on January 14, citing the ongoing civic poll process.

However, the SEC allowed the state government to deposit the December 2025 financial aid of Rs 1,500, stating that it is part of the ongoing scheme and does not violate the Model Code of Conduct for the elections to 29 municipal corporations scheduled for January 15.

The SEC had sought a report from Chief Secretary Rajesh Agarwal by 11 a.m. on Monday over BJP Minister Girish Mahajan’s claim that the Mahayuti government would deposit Rs 3,000 — covering aid for December 2025 and January 2026 — into the accounts of eligible beneficiaries of the Ladki Bahin Yojana before Makar Sankranti.

The Commission had asked for the factual position and whether the government intended to distribute two months' worth of funds collectively immediately before polling.

The SEC’s move came after opposition parties slammed the Mahayuti alliance, alleging that it was an attempt to woo women voters and amounted to a violation of the Model Code of Conduct.

Mahajan had last week said in a post on X: “From Deva Bhau, the beloved sisters will receive.. A grand gift for Makar Sankranti! Before January 14, 3000 rupees for the months of December and January will be deposited into the bank accounts of the beloved sisters!”

SEC sources said the Commission received a report from the Chief Secretary stating that Ladki Bahin Yojana is an ongoing scheme like Sanjay Gandhi Niradhar Yojana and others, and the government would continue disbursement under the scheme.

The Chief Secretary also clarified that there would be no violation of the Model Code of Conduct as it does not apply to ongoing schemes, the sources said.

However, the Commission took the view that while the government is entitled to pay the December 2025 aid to eligible women beneficiaries, it cannot pay the January instalment in advance during the ongoing election process.

Earlier, Advocate Sandesh Kondvilkar, General Secretary of the state Congress, submitted a letter to the State Election Commission on Saturday.

He claimed that the state government intended to deposit Rs 3,000 (combined instalments for December 2025 and January 2026) into the accounts of beneficiaries on January 14, exactly one day before voting.

The Congress argued that this would violate the Model Code of Conduct and serve as an inducement to women voters, urging the Commission to stop the payment.

Amid the row over the timing of the financial aid disbursement, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis hit back, saying: “When we started the scheme, Congress leaders went to the High Court to stop it, but that petition didn't hold. Now they are saying don't give the money. ‘Ladki Bahin’ is a continuous ongoing scheme of the state government, and such schemes do not fall under the restrictions of the election code of conduct. No matter what Congress says, the funds will be given to our beloved sisters.”

However, Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee President Harshwardhan Sapkal argued: “Congress is not opposed to the Ladki Bahin scheme at all. However, if the government gives not one, but two months' worth of money on January 14 — the day before voting — it is a clear violation of the code of conduct. Our only demand is that the Commission should stop this specific act.”

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Open in app