Has the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in West Bengal—particularly its adjudication phase—reshaped the state’s electorate ahead of assembly elections? The question arises amid data suggesting that constituencies with higher Muslim populations saw disproportionately larger deletions during the process.
Given that Muslim voters are generally seen as less likely to support the Bharatiya Janata Party and more inclined towards the Trinamool Congress, such deletions could carry political implications. But determining whether this amounts to gerrymandering requires a more layered analysis.
A three-step lens
Earlier analyses of SIR exercises in states like Bihar showed that while electoral rolls shrank post-revision, they still remained larger than the number of actual voters in previous elections. Much of the deletion was attributed to “deadwood”—duplicate entries, deceased voters, or those who had migrated. This also had the effect of boosting turnout percentages.
Similar patterns were observed in Kerala and Assam. In Bengal too, the revised voter list still exceeds the number of ballots cast in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. However, to avoid a fall in absolute votes in the upcoming assembly polls, turnout would need to surge significantly—from 81.7% in 2021 to nearly 89%.
Uneven deletions across constituencies
The more contentious issue lies at the assembly constituency (AC) level. Data suggests that 67 constituencies which have elected at least one Muslim MLA since 2011 saw a disproportionately higher share of deletions during adjudication compared to earlier stages.
A similar trend is visible in 16 constituencies associated with the Matua community—a Dalit group with roots in present-day Bangladesh—many of which are Scheduled Caste-reserved seats. These areas too recorded relatively higher deletions, though they include diverse voter bases.
In three constituencies—Metiaburuz, Lalgola and Samserganj—the total number of electors has already fallen below 2024 levels. More broadly, 96 constituencies now have less than a 10% gap between current electors and past voter turnout, raising the possibility of reduced total votes unless turnout increases sharply.
In fact, over 120 constituencies would require turnout levels above 90% just to match previous vote counts—an unusually high bar. Among these are several Muslim- and Matua-dominated seats.
Is this gerrymandering?
A definitive answer remains elusive without granular, religion-wise voter roll data before and after SIR. However, probabilistic reasoning suggests that higher deletions in certain constituencies could imply a greater impact on specific communities.
Another angle is voter behaviour. Data indicates that Muslim-dominated constituencies tended to have lower turnout in 2024, while Matua-dominated ones were relatively higher. This opens up two interpretations: either electoral rolls in some areas had more ineligible entries, or lower participation reflected voter disengagement.
With the current elections unfolding against the backdrop of these revisions, turnout patterns—especially in affected constituencies—will be crucial. Whether higher deletions translate into political advantage or are offset by increased voter mobilisation will only become clear once detailed, seat-wise turnout data is available.
Comments are closed.