Concerns of southern states regarding the impending delimitation exercise after the freeze on it lapses in 2026 are valid. Tamil Nadu chief minister MK Stalin, who is one of the most vocal critics of the proposed delimitation, has justifiably framed it as an existential threat. Delimitation based on population would alter the balance in favour of northern states and political parties with a formidable presence there.
But he is wrong on two counts. First is his appallingly obnoxious call for turning women from Tamil Nadu into baby-producing factories. The second is to misread BJP’s weaponization of delimitation simply as a tool of vengeance against states that have performed better in population control. The argument that delimitation should not consider population alone as the cardinal principle for redistricting of electoral boundaries may miss the point of what the BJP intends to do.
Stalin need not look far to understand what a politically motivated gerrymandering can do irrespective of whether or not population is considered as the main criteria. The case of Jammu and Kashmir’s delimitation where the population logic was discarded to give more electoral heft to Hindu-majority Jammu region should be instructive.
According to the final J&K Delimitation Order 2022, based on the 2011 census, 43 assembly constituencies were given to Jammu province, and 47 to Kashmir province. The seven newly-carved constituencies were unevenly distributed between the two provinces that are geographically, culturally, linguistically and politically distinct. Six out of seven seats were allotted to Hindu-majority Jammu, whose population is much less than that of Muslim-majority Kashmir. According to the 2011 census, the population of Jammu division was 53.5 lakh, and 68.88 lakhs that of Kashmir. The population growth in both the regions over the previous decade was even and much below the national average.
Contrary to the fears of the southern states, delimitation in Jammu and Kashmir glossed over the population factor – which is the primary basis for determining the redistricting of boundaries – and yet it was massively flawed. According to the delimitation act, the secondary factors are geographical compactness, physical features, boundaries of administrative units, communication and public convenience. These are generally considered to accommodate the needs of remote areas.
While redrawing the electoral map of Jammu and Kashmir, the delimitation commission relied more on principles like area and ‘border areas’ over population, but all these principles were only selectively applied, keeping the average size of Muslim majority constituencies larger while increasing the number of Hindu majority constituencies. Interestingly, while constituencies along the Line of Control (LoC), which bear a larger burden of remoteness and militarization, were ignored, the criteria was selectively applied in border constituencies that lie on the International Border (IB) and are better connected. A coinciding faultline is that the constituencies along IB are Hindu majority as opposed to those on the LoC, which are Muslim-majority.
A micro-level examination of many constituencies across Jammu and Kashmir revealed a reckless slicing of areas and adding them with lesser connected constituencies, resulting in strengthening of Hindu consolidation. While the number of parliamentary constituencies remained the same, the delimitation commission’s wear and tear of boundaries signaled a similar pattern.
While redrawing the electoral map of Jammu and Kashmir, the delimitation commission relied more on principles like area and ‘border areas’ over population, but all these principles were only selectively applied, keeping the average size of Muslim majority constituencies larger while increasing the number of Hindu majority constituencies.
Before the delimitation, Kashmir province had three parliamentary constituencies – Baramulla, Srinagar and Anantnag, and Jammu had two – Jammu-Poonch and Udhampur. The redistricting of seismic proportions included cleaving Anantnag, adding one part of it to Srinagar and the other to Rajouri and Poonch in Jammu province, thus reducing Muslim representation of Anantnag constituency from 98% to 84%.
The absurdity of the creation of the Anantnag-Rajouri parliamentary constituency lies in the illogical move of clubbing two physically and culturally disconnected regions together. Anantnag and Poonch are separated by a mountain road that remains practically shut for five months. Simultaneously, it removed Shopian (earlier a part of Anantnag constituency) even though the connecting road passes through this town.
In Kashmir, the overall delimitation exercise is regarded as a deliberate attempt to fragment Kashmir's cultural and political cohesion rather than creating functional electoral districts based on geographic accessibility or community needs. Even in Jammu, many opposition parties accused the delimitation commission of operating like a BJP rubber stamp. While there is no evidence to prove such allegations, the BJP reaped its harvest in the recent assembly elections by increasing its previous tally of 25 MLAs to 29.
Much before the Jammu and Kashmir Delimitation Commission was set up, the terms of engagement were already determined. In a clear case of putting the cart before the horse, the commission was assigned to redraw and increase assembly and parliamentary constituencies in J&K, in accordance with the Delimitation Act 2002 and Section 60 of the J&K Reorganisation Act of 2019. The latter had already laid down “the number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir shall be increased from 107 to 114”. This number includes the 24 seats reserved for Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Like the Jammu and Kashmir case, it seems the size of the new parliament building is pre-calculated. The pieces of the political chess board are already in place. The new parliament building that Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated almost two years ago contains seating for 888 elected members, exceeding the current strength of 543. In this architectural foresight is the forewarning of the outcome of the proposed delimitation. The uninspiring building is an aesthetic monstrosity and seems perfectly suited for its purpose – housing a predetermined democratic expansion. The building wasn’t ugly by accident. It was meant to facilitate a problematic purpose.
The new parliament building that Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated almost two years ago contains seating for 888 elected members, exceeding the current strength of 543. In this architectural foresight is the forewarning of the outcome of the proposed delimitation.
That purpose is not only to dwarf South India where the BJP has been unable to penetrate easily. Population becomes a handy tool in these states, but as the Jammu and Kashmir experience reveals, these will not be the sole weapons in the arsenal of the BJP, which wishes to populate the extra seats in the parliament with more BJP representatives.
It is not only the southern states that will feel the brunt. Many constituencies in the north will also suffer the consequences, with detrimental impact on the electoral fortunes of opposition parties as the Jammu and Kashmir experiment reveals. Their silence on Jammu and Kashmir which was singled out for conducting a delimitation ahead of nation-wide defreezing, its illogical gerrymandering and introducing nominated members with voting rights amounts to their complicity and legitimizing a wrong precedent. They should not commit another blunder with their disunity.
Stalin, who has reached out to selective political parties for a united strategy, should cast a wider net and pivot from north-south division to nationwide cohesion. It is not just about population, any delimitation process for expansion of the parliament has to be logical, fair, transparent and participatory. That is too much to expect from the BJP even as Home Minister Amit Shah has assured that the strength of no state will be reduced. A deeper study of Jammu and Kashmir’s delimitation will show why his promises can’t inspire confidence.
If it can’t be a fair process, it can well be frozen for another decade or more. Deeping democracy does not depend on sheer bulk of numbers.
Anuradha Bhasin is the Managing Editor of the Kashmir Times and author of ‘A Dismantled State: The Untold Story of Kashmir After 370’.
In times of misinformation, you need news you can trust. We’ve got you covered. Subscribe to Newslaundry and power our work.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
