Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) on Thursday, 23 July launched a sharp attack on the Centre through its mouthpiece Saamana, accusing the Narendra Modi-led government of shielding large corporate loan defaulters while subjecting ordinary citizens to stringent debt-recovery action. The party's editorial follows official data tabled in Parliament confirming that public sector banks wrote off ₹7.75 lakh crore in bad loans across 1,249 accounts — each carrying dues of ₹100 crore or more — between FY 2014-15 and FY 2025-26.

The Parliamentary Data Behind the Attack

The figures were disclosed by Union Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary in a written reply to the Lok Sabha. According to that reply, of the ₹7.75 lakh crore written off, banks have so far recovered only ₹3.10 lakh crore, leaving a net unrecovered gap of over ₹4.65 lakh crore. The government's defence — that loan write-offs are a standard technical accounting exercise for non-recoverable debts and do not amount to outright waivers — was rejected outright by the Thackeray camp.

Saamana's Charge: 'Amrit Kaal of Default'

The editorial labelled the present period an 'Amrit Kaal of Default', a pointed inversion of the ruling dispensation's signature phrase for India's development era. 'An Amrit Kaal of Loan Defaulting has commenced in the country, where poor cockroaches must tighten their belts to pay off their loan instalments, while wealthy billionaires get to bankrupt the banks. If the government itself is complicit, who is going to stop these robbers from looting public money?' the editorial asked. It further charged that 'taking massive loans, repaying a tiny fraction, and defaulting on the rest seems to have received official state sanction.'

The Confidentiality Controversy

A central grievance in the editorial is the government's refusal to name the 1,249 large defaulting accounts. Officials cited Section 45E of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Act, which mandates confidentiality over credit information, as the legal basis for withholding identities. The Saamana editorial questioned the asymmetry this creates: 'Why are the names of small default borrowers publicly advertised in newspapers, while billionaire defaulters are shielded behind confidentiality clauses? Why are properties, vehicles, and homes of middle-class citizens, small business owners, and farmers seized or sealed over tiny defaults, while big corporate tycoons face no such action?'

Political Allegation: Donations for Write-Offs

The Uddhav Thackeray-led party escalated the political charge by alleging that the defaulting corporates may be significant donors to the ruling party, suggesting an unspoken arrangement of 'Give donations, get loan write-offs.' The editorial described the situation as open collusion between 'fraudsters in industry and big fraudsters in government,' warning that public money remains dangerously unsecured if the state itself shields such elements. The Centre has not responded to these specific allegations.

Context and What Comes Next

This is not the first time bank write-offs have become a political flashpoint. Opposition parties have periodically raised the issue of large corporate non-performing assets (NPAs) since at least 2018, when high-profile cases such as those of Vijay Mallya and Nirav Modi drew national attention. The fresh parliamentary disclosure gives the opposition renewed ammunition ahead of the ongoing Budget Session. The government is likely to face further pressure in Parliament to either disclose defaulter identities or detail the recovery roadmap for the remaining ₹4.65 lakh crore.