Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu is the second-richest chief minister in the country, while his Telangana counterpart, A Revanth Reddy, has declared the highest number of criminal cases among chief ministers.

This was revealed in the latest report released by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), detailing the declared assets, criminal cases, educational qualifications and age profiles of chief ministers across India.

The details were compiled from affidavits submitted by the chief ministers during elections.

According to the ADR report, the combined declared assets of the 31 chief ministers governing 28 states and three Union Territories stand at approximately Rs 3,660 crore.

Karnataka Chief Minister D K Shivakumar emerged as the wealthiest chief minister in the country, with declared assets worth Rs 1,413 crore, while Chandrababu Naidu ranked second with assets valued at Rs 931 crore.

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Joseph Vijay secured the third position with declared assets worth Rs 648 crore. Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy was placed eighth, with declared assets exceeding Rs 30 crore.

At the other end of the spectrum, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah reported the lowest declared assets at Rs 55 lakh.

West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari ranked second among the least wealthy chief ministers, with assets worth Rs 85 lakh, followed by Rajasthan Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma, who declared assets of around Rs 1 crore.

The report also highlighted that 14 of the 31 chief ministers had declared criminal cases against themselves.

Revanth Reddy topped the list with 89 criminal cases, while the West Bengal Chief Minister ranked second with 29 cases. Shivakumar and Chandrababu Naidu each declared 19 criminal cases.

According to ADR, both leaders also disclosed cases involving charges related to attempted murder in their election affidavits.

The report noted that most of the 89 cases declared by Revanth Reddy arose from political protests, rallies, demonstrations and election campaign activities. Most of these cases are currently pending before various courts.

ADR emphasised that the existence of criminal cases does not imply guilt and that the information is based entirely on self-declarations made by candidates in their election affidavits.

The names, current offices and ADR figures should be verified before publication.