"I Took the Money": BJP Member’s Bombshell Confession in Panchayat Scandal

A sensational case of alleged vote-buying has surfaced from the 20 No. Topatoli Gaon Panchayat under Kamrup (Metro) district, casting a shadow over the integrity of the recently concluded Assam Panchayat elections. The controversy centres around two BJP members and has sparked widespread outrage across political and civil circles.

At the heart of the storm is a written declaration dated June 29, 2025, in which Dilip Kro, a resident of Dakshin Topatoli village and a BJP worker, admits to accepting ₹1 lakh in exchange for his support to Sumit Sarkar—also a BJP member—for the post of President of Ward No. 3.

In the document, signed and dated, Kro states:

“I, Dilip Kro, … support Sumit Sarkar as President of Ward 3 and in return have received ₹1 lakh as acknowledgment. I make this declaration in full knowledge and sound mind.”

The handwritten statement, which has now gone viral on social media, has raised serious questions about the use of money power in local body elections and the growing erosion of ethical standards in rural governance.

Sumit Sarkar, who has since emerged victorious from Ward No. 3, has not issued any public statement in response to the explosive revelation.

According to sources confirmed by Pratidin Time, both individuals are said to be affiliated with the Bharatiya Janata Party, adding a significant political dimension to the alleged cash-for-post scandal.

While no formal complaint has been filed so far, local civil society groups and opposition leaders have condemned the alleged cash-for-post deal and demanded immediate action from the Kamrup (Metro) district administration and the Assam State Election Commission. Activists argue that such incidents not only violate the democratic spirit but also undermine public faith in Panchayati Raj institutions.

“This is not just about one ward or one panchayat. If the allegations are proven, it reflects a systemic rot that threatens grassroots democracy itself,” said a member of a local rights group, urging authorities to conduct a fair and transparent investigation.

Despite the mounting pressure, the administration has yet to issue an official statement. The State Election Commission, too, has remained silent on the matter as of the time of reporting.

If validated, the alleged transaction could have serious legal and political consequences, potentially inviting charges under the Representation of the People Act and anti-corruption laws. More broadly, it adds to the growing chorus of concerns over the use of financial inducements in rural electoral politics, where power struggles often play out far from the public eye.

As the dust refuses to settle in Topatoli, all eyes are now on the authorities—will they act to protect the sanctity of the ballot, or let another case of cash-for-post fade into silence?

Also Read: Pipes Run Dry, Pockets Overflow: Inside the Jal Jeevan Scam Under Baruah’s Watch