The Congress party on Thursday raised serious accusations against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Parliament (MP) Nishikant Dubey, alleging a ‘disproportionate’ growth in the assets of his wife, Anamika Gautam. The opposition party stated that Dubey needs to provide explanations for these asset increases, suggesting it could be a significant corruption scandal.
The Congress has called for a comprehensive investigation into the matter. At the time of reporting, there had been no immediate response from Dubey, his wife, or the BJP regarding the allegations.
Supriya Shrinate, a Congress spokesperson, presented details from a case filed with the Lokpal concerning the growth of Dubey’s wife’s movable and immovable assets, as stated in his election affidavits across various years. Shrinate pointed out inconsistencies between Gautam’s declared income and her accumulating assets.
She detailed that a complaint was lodged with the Lokpal on May 24, 2025, regarding Dubey’s wife’s property. Subsequently, on July 24, 2025, the Lokpal directed Dubey to respond within four weeks. Shrinate noted that it remains unclear whether a response was provided or what the outcome of the complaint was.
According to Dubey’s election affidavits starting from 2009, Shrinate claimed that in 2009, his wife Gautam possessed movable assets worth ₹50 lakh and no immovable assets. By the 2014 affidavit, her movable assets had reportedly increased to ₹1.03 crore, with immovable assets accumulating to ₹5.53 crore.
In 2019, Gautam’s movable assets reportedly rose to ₹3.72 crore, and her immovable assets reached ₹9.35 crore, bringing her total assets to ₹13.06 crore. By 2024, her total assets had allegedly surged to approximately ₹31.32 crore.
Shrinate emphasized that both the BJP and Dubey should address these allegations transparently, as the situation appears to indicate disproportionate assets and substantial corruption. She further suggested that Dubey might face consequences, potentially including the loss of his Lok Sabha membership, over this issue and also questioned the transparency of the Lokpal’s proceedings.