West Bengal Political Science Review | Vol. XXVIII, 2026 | ISSN: 2230-8296
Democracy and Political Defection in West Bengal: A Case Study of Domkal Block of Murshidabad District
Introduction:
India is a liberal democratic state. One of the most important features of a liberal democratic state is the presence of political parties. Political party, a group of persons organized to acquire and exercise political power. Political parties originated in their modern form in Europe and the United States in the 19th century, along with the electoral and parliamentary systems, whose developments reflects the evolution of parties. The term party has since come to be applied to all organized groups seeking political power, whether by democratic elections or by revolution (Britanica 15 February 2025).
India is no exception in this regard. Various political parties are present in India as well. Different types of political parties participate in the electoral system here. After the election, based on the people’s opinion, a government is formed with a majority in the seats. However, one of the corrupt aspects of India’s electoral system is political defection. Political parties participate in elections based on various ideologies. Political party supporters promote their party’s ideology before the election and promise to work according to that ideology if they win. In our country, we see the presence of various political parties, and their ideologies are also of different kinds. Some ideologies of political parties are completely opposite to the ideologies of other parties. Some political parties (such as the Indian National Congress, Trinamool Congress) believe in liberal democratic ideologies, while some parties (such as the Bhartiya Janata Party, AIMIM, Shiv Sena) emphasize religious ideologies. Additionally, some parties (such as CPI(M)) believe in socialist ideologies. Here, the Indian National Congress and the Bhartiya Janata Party believe in completely opposite ideologies; similarly, BJP, Congress, and CPI(M) have entirely different ideologies. Just as oil and water have different properties, their functions and processes are also different. One can never use them for the same purpose, nor can the work of oil be done by water or vice versa. In the same way, people with different ideologies will have different work styles and approaches. However, if we analyse India’s political history, it will be seen that, before and after elections, politicians have changed parties for various reasons at different times. This defection is not only a change of political parties but also a change of ideologies. When a politician shifts from one party to another, they abandon the principles and ideologies of the former party and accept the ideologies of the new party. This raises a question: On what basis was the person originally part of the party? Did they actually work according to the principles and ideologies of that party? Or did they fully adopt the ideologies of the new party they joined? This is a matter that requires evidence.
Research Objectives and Questions:
This research seeks to:
- Examine the causes and consequences of political defection at the Panchayat level in Domkal.
- Assess the effectiveness of anti-defection laws under Section 213A of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973.
- Understand the role of ideology and self-interest in the decision-making processes of defecting representatives.
Key questions include:
- What motivates elected Panchayat members to defect?
- How does political defection affect democratic accountability and voter trust?
- To what extent are ideological commitments retained or abandoned during defection?
Methodology
The research employs a qualitative case study approach. Data were collected through fieldwork conducted in Domkal block between January and April 2024. Semi-structured interviews were held with four elected representatives who had switched political parties at the Panchayat level. These interviews aimed to uncover the personal motivations behind defection and the systemic pressures that contributed to their decisions. Secondary sources include legal texts, government records, and media reports. A thematic analysis was conducted to identify patterns related to ideology, political coercion, self-interest, and legal loopholes.
By placing these local-level events within a broader institutional and legal framework, the study reveals how political defection continues to undermine democratic governance despite the presence of legal safeguards. The Domkal case also offers insights into how local democratic institutions are influenced by a mix of personal ambition, weak legal enforcement, and voter perceptions.
About Political Defection:
If we look at the current politics of India, we can see that political defection is also evident among political parties with opposing ideologies. However, before discussing that, it is important to highlight what political defection actually means. Providing a universally accepted definition of political defection is a very difficult task. However, Dr. Subhash Chandra Kashyap has tried to explain what political defection means in his book ‘The Politics of Defection’. Additionally, the ‘52nd Amendment of the Indian Constitution’ also provides a clear concept of the defection of political parties.
According to Subhash Chandra Kashyap, if a person wins an election under the banner of a specific political party and its symbol, and then leaves that party to join another political party, or if a person is nominated by a political party and then leaves it to become an independent member, or after being elected as an independent candidate, joins a political party, or if a person votes against the party on significant issues without leaving the party, all of these behaviours or any one of them, when influenced by such actions, is considered defection. In other words, he has identified any change in the political symbol as political defection.
The 52nd Amendment Act of the Indian Constitution, which is known as the Anti-Defection Law, is discussed in detail. According to the Anti-Defection Law, a person will be considered a defector when they:
1. After being elected as a candidate of a political party in either house of Parliament or the State Legislature, if a person voluntarily resigns from the party, is expelled from the party, or votes or abstains from voting contrary to the party’s direction,
2. If, before being nominated as a member of Parliament or the State Legislature, a person is a member of any political party or joins a political party within two months of being nominated as a member of the legislature, and then resigns from the party, is expelled from the party, or votes or abstains from voting contrary to the party’s direction in the legislature,
3. If, prior to being nominated as a member of Parliament or the State Legislature, a person is not a member of any party, and within six months of becoming a member of the legislature, does not join any political party, but later joins a party,
4. If a person is elected as an independent candidate in Parliament or the State Legislature and then joins a political party,
Various measures have been taken from time to time to protect India from the harmful effects of defections and to prevent party switching. Political defection is not a new phenomenon. Even before India’s independence, instances of defection were observed during British rule. In 1919, during the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, Shyamlal Nehru, a member of the Central Legislative Assembly, won on a Congress ticket but later switched allegiance to the British. In 1950, 23 MLAs of Congress in Uttar Pradesh defected and formed the Jan Congress. In 1953, in Andhra Pradesh, Praja Socialist Party leader Prakasham defected and formed a Congress government. Between 1957-1967, 97 members defected from the Congress Party and joined other parties, while 419 members joined Congress. In the period from 1967-1968, 175 members defected from Congress and 139 members joined Congress. During the 1967 general elections, around 2,000 instances of political defection were observed. In 1971, about 50% of legislators switched parties. Some individuals even changed parties up to five times. Until 1967, around 400 individuals had defected, but after 1967, nearly 500 people defected within a year. Among them, 118 individuals gained ministerial positions in the central or state legislatures.
In light of these events, it can be said that defection is dangerous for democracy. To address this issue, in 1967, a prominent member of the Lok Sabha from Congress, P. Venkatasubaiya, proposed the formation of a committee. In 1968, the Government of India, under the leadership of the Union Home Minister Y. B. Chavan, formed a committee to study the problem of defection. On February 18, 1969, this committee presented its report in Parliament. Based on the Chavan Committee’s report on defection, the 32nd Amendment Bill to the Indian Constitution was introduced in 1973, which proposed changes to Articles 102 and 191 of the Indian Constitution. However, this bill was cancelled in 1977. Later, on August 28, 1978, the 48th Amendment Bill to the Constitution was introduced. During its introduction, both the ruling and opposition leaders opposed the bill, resulting in its cancellation.
Nearly seven years later, on January 24, 1985, the 52nd Amendment Bill of the Indian Constitution was introduced in the Lok Sabha. The purpose of the bill was:
1. To solve the problem of political defection, which was dangerous for democracy.
2. It was designed to disqualify elected members from Parliament or the State Legislature if they defected from their party, voted contrary to their party’s directives, or were expelled from their party. Even members who joined a political party after being elected independently would fall under this law. It also proposed the disqualification of nominated members under this law. In this context, the role of the presiding officer of the house is significant.
The bill was passed in the Lok Sabha on January 30, 1985, and in the Rajya Sabha on January 31, 1985, in the same year. On February 15, 1985, the President signed the bill, and it became law. However, the law came into effect on March 1, 1985. The 52nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution amended Articles 101, 102, 190, and 191, and added a new schedule (the Tenth Schedule). The Tenth Schedule states:
1. An elected or nominated member, who was a member of a political party at the time of their election to Parliament or the State Legislature, will be disqualified due to defection if they voluntarily resign from the party, vote contrary to the party’s directions, or abstain from voting.
2. An independent member, who has been elected to Parliament or the State Legislature, will be disqualified if they join any political party after the election.
3. A nominated member, who was not a member of any political party at the time of their nomination to Parliament or the State Legislature, will be disqualified if they join a political party after six months from the date of their nomination.
4. A member will not be disqualified if they claim to represent a faction arising out of a split or merger of the party, provided that in the case of a split, the faction comprises at least one-third of the members of the concerned legislature party, and in the case of a merger, the faction comprises at least two-thirds of the members of the concerned legislature party.
5. A person elected as the Speaker or Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha or State Legislature, or as the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha or State Legislature, will not be disqualified if they decide to sever their connection with their political party.
6. The Chairman or the Speaker of the relevant house will determine whether a member of Parliament or the State Legislature has become disqualified. If the matter concerns the Chairman or Speaker themselves, it will be decided by a member elected by the relevant house.
7. The Chairman or Speaker of a house is empowered to make rules to enforce the provisions of the Schedule. These rules must be presented before the house and will be subject to amendments or rejection by the house.
8. According to Paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, no court shall adjudicate any matter related to the disqualification of a member.
Political defection has had a negative impact on Indian democracy. It has led to various negative reactions among Indian citizens. A state of disorder has arisen in Indian politics. Even after winning elections, political parties are experiencing an uncertain situation in governance. The politics of defection is fostering corruption and chaos in India’s political landscape. The unethical defections of MPs and MLAs are creating a severe crisis in the political culture and values of India, including in the states. By weakening the foundation of party-based governments, it makes the collapse of the parliamentary democratic system inevitable. Governments formed on the basis of a marginal majority are at risk of collapsing due to defections, leading to deep uncertainty regarding the stability of the government.
Defection has also had a significant negative impact on India’s social system. Citizens vote to elect the person or political party of their choice. However, after the elections, it is often seen that the elected individual ignores the citizens and defects for personal gain to assume power, leading to a negative attitude among citizens towards the election process and voting. Indian democracy is based on majority rule, yet a political party that the majority of people want to oust may still return to power, which means that a minority party is establishing governance against the will of the majority.
Additionally, after elections, the so-called trading of MPs and MLAs leads to a significant waste of money in Indian politics. Frequent changes in government result in frequent elections. Holding elections means a huge expenditure of money, and not just money, it also disrupts the functioning of the government. However, political defection does not only have negative consequences; it also has some positive aspects. Often, it is seen that the absence of one or a few MLAs can disrupt the formation of a government. In such cases, defection can help form a stable government.
Moreover, when members are part of opposition political parties, they are sometimes unable to carry out essential activities for the citizens. This is because the ruling government often obstructs the representatives of the opposition parties from executing people-oriented tasks. Therefore, in order to carry out welfare-oriented, people-centric activities for the citizens, representatives sometimes have to switch parties. In other words, defection is sometimes done with the intention of promoting public welfare. From this perspective, defection can be considered positive.
Moreover, when representatives are part of opposition political parties, they are sometimes unable to carry out necessary activities for the citizens. This is because the ruling government often obstructs the representatives of the opposition parties from executing people-oriented tasks. Therefore, in order to carry out welfare-oriented, people-centric activities for the citizens, representatives sometimes have to switch parties.
There are certain reasons why political defection can be considered dangerous for democracy. According to Abraham Lincoln, ‘Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, and for the people’(Gettysburg Address), this quote, the opinion of the people is considered crucial in the management of democracy. India is based on a parliamentary democracy. According to this system, the government is run based on the majority opinion of the people. After a general election, the political party or coalition that secures the majority forms and runs the government. The political party that the majority of citizens dislike after the election is ousted from power.
A review of India’s political history shows that, in some states, after elections to the state legislature, political parties that failed to secure a majority were able to form a government by purchasing legislators from the majority party. As a result, the majority opinion of the citizens is being ignored. In another case, citizens vote against a political party’s ideology, but after the election, some leaders and representatives who believe in that ideology join the ruling party and are considered part of its core committee. In this case as well, the importance of the citizens’ preferences is significantly reduced. In other words, it can be said that democracy is greatly affected.
This defection mostly occurs in favour of the ruling party. Looking at Murshidabad district in West Bengal, it can be seen that various political figures from parties such as CPI(M), Congress, and RSP joined the ruling party, Trinamool Congress, before and after various elections. In the case of Murshidabad district, most of the political defections are towards the Trinamool Congress, i.e., the state government. However, the political landscape of the state shows a somewhat different picture. Here, defections are observed in favour of both Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). In other words, defections are occurring in favor of two ruling parties. This indicates that political defection plays a crucial role in the struggle for power. If we look beyond West Bengal, the same trend can be observed in other states.
The reasons for party switching have been explained by different individuals in various ways. For example, some have said, “Dole theke kaj korte parchilam na”(I couldn’t work within the party), “Doler vetor dom bondho hoye aschilo” (I was suffocating within the party), “PK’r Doler varate soino diye juddho joy somvob noy” (A war cannot be won with rented soldiers of PK’s party,) etc. In other words, they switch parties under the pretext of wanting to work for the people. Analysing India’s political history, it has been observed that political defections have occurred at different times for various reasons. It is believed that there may be several other reasons behind these defections. Some of these reasons include:
1. After parliamentary or state legislative elections, various members of parliament or legislators are bought with money to gain a majority. Legislators or members of parliament switch parties for financial gain.
2. Political defections in India are also organized by the desire to gain political prestige and government benefits under the protection of the ruling political party.
3. Additionally, the lack of a proper ideology in some of India’s political parties also facilitates defections. Disagreements with party leadership, disrespect for the party’s ideology and agenda, corruption allegations against the chief minister, etc., are some of the reasons behind defection.
4. Often, it is observed that those who switch parties easily get an election ticket. Thus, someone who fails to get a ticket from a political party switches to another party and easily succeeds in securing an election ticket.
5. Small disputes between political parties help leaders and politicians switch parties.
6. Political party defections also occur due to the lack of principles within political parties. No political party wants to stop defections for their own benefit.
Case Study: Political Defection in Domkal Block:
There were a number of incidents of political defection occurred in the institutional and processes that involve politics. Domkal block of the district of Murshidabad can be one of such social arenas where it was noticeable. Examples can vouch for this proposition. Respondent A, from the 6th number Bhagirathpur Panchayat under the Domkal block, contested the Panchayat Samiti elections in 2013 as a candidate from the Indian National Congress party, representing six booths of Bhagirathpur Panchayat. She won by 13 votes and became the Agriculture Chairperson of the Panchayat Samiti. In 2016, she was lured with the prospect of becoming the President of the Panchayat Samiti and switched parties to Trinamool Congress, where she eventually became the President of the Panchayat Samiti. Later, in the 2018 elections, when the opposition was wiped out, her position as the President was further extended. However, in the 2023 election, she was defeated by 306 votes. Despite her defeat, her party switch in 2016 was not well-received by the voters in her area. As a result, in 2018, she contested from another panchayat (11th Madhurakul Panchayat) representing seven booths. She won unopposed in the election, as no candidate from the opposition was allowed to stand. Opposition members claimed that they were not allowed to nominate a candidate during that time, with one leader from the CPI(M), stating, “At that time, the elections were rigged, and no opposition candidates were allowed to submit nominations.”
On the other hand, Respondent B, the current member of the Murshidabad Zilla Parishad, entered politics in 2013 through his mother. His mother was a member of the Indian National Congress in the 11th Madhurakul Panchayat of the Domkal block. Respondent A managed all political campaigns and activities on her behalf. In 2016, he switched from the Indian National Congress to the Trinamool Congress, stating that the switch was “mandatory.” He explained that during his time in Congress, he was frequently offered large sums of money, but when nothing came of it, he was framed with 10 to 12 false cases (some of which are still unresolved). Due to these circumstances, he felt compelled to switch parties. He even said, “Since Trinamool is in power now, I joined them, but when Congress returns to power, I will switch again.” After switching parties, he became the Block President of Domkal. In 2018, he won the 11th Madhurakul Panchayat unopposed, but fearing that his constituents might not support him due to his party switch, he contested the 2023 elections from the Domkal Zila Parishad 39 and won the Zilla Parishad seat with 19636 votes.
In the 6th Bhagirathpur Gram Panchayat, Respondent C contested the Panchayat elections in 2013 as a CPI(M) candidate and won by 77 votes, becoming the Panchayat Pradhan. Due to financial incentives, the threat of false cases, and other pressures, she was forced to join Trinamool Congress in 2016. In 2018, she was made a candidate for the Panchayat Samiti and won unopposed. However, in 2023, she faced a major defeat, losing by 401 votes.
A different scenario can be seen with Respondent D, the current Panchayat Pradhan of the 6th Bhagirathpur Gram Panchayat (Bhagirathpur/X11) in 2023. He won as a member of the Trinamool Congress in 2018 and began working as a member of the Bhagirathpur Gram Panchayat. He wanted to work for the people and did so. However, due to differences with the then Panchayat Pradhan, he was expelled from the Trinamool Congress. According to a spontaneous member of the party, “His transparent work caused problems for the then Panchayat Pradhan, which led to his removal from the party.” He joined the Indian National Congress and in the 2023 elections, he won by 100 votes and became the Panchayat Pradhan. In the 2023 Panchayat elections, the Left-Congress alliance formed a Panchayat in the Domkal block. As this Panchayat was from the opposition, both the Panchayat Pradhan and various members faced immense pressure. At times, they were offered bribes, and if they refused, they were threatened with various legal cases. Despite this, Respondent D did not change his party and continued to perform his duties independently.
Summary of Political Defection Case in Domkal Block:
| Respondent | Original Party | Defected to | Key Motivation | Outcome |
| A | INC | AITC | Access to development funds. | Retained seat, gained committee post, Lost subsequent election. |
| B | INC | AITC | Coercion through legal threats. | Won re-election under new party. |
| C | CPI(M) | AITC | Ideological shift, dissatisfaction with leadership. | Retained seat, gained committee post, Lost subsequent election. |
| D | AITC | INC | AITC Denied party nomination, sought political survival. | Retained position after switch. |
The most common reasons for party switching are therefore that emerged through the interviews of four individuals are as follows: firstly: The lure of positions, secondly: Political pressure, thirdly: False cases, fourthly: Obstruction in performing transparent work, fifthly: The desire to gain loyalty from the government. These factor for all four party-switching individuals is the lure of positions. After switching parties, each person advanced to a higher position. In this case, Respondent A was the Agriculture Member of Panchayat Samiti and switched parties to become the Chairperson of the Panchayat Samiti. Respondent B was initially a minor party worker, from there he became the Block President and later a Member of the District Council. Respondent C, who was the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, switched parties and became a member of the Panchayat Samiti. On the other hand, Respondent D, who was an ordinary member of the Gram Panchayat, switched parties and is now the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat (although his position is different from the others, as he is the only one who acquired his position through election). Therefore, all four individuals have reached higher positions than their previous roles.
The second reason for party switching, political pressure, applies to Respondent B and Respondent D. Both faced various obstacles in carrying out government work. Respondent B, who was against the government, used to manage his mother’s affairs and worked on her behalf. The ruling party at the time created various obstacles in his work, and even important tasks did not reach his Panchayat area. On the other hand, Respondent D, despite being a member of the government side, faced various hurdles from the then Panchayat head because his activities interfered with the extra income of the Panchayat Pradhan.
The third reason was false cases, applies to Respondent Band Respondent C. Respondent Bwas falsely implicated some cases. Respondent C was threatened with false cases.
The fourth point is that transparent work can also be a reason for political pressure. Respondent D was expelled from his party due to his transparent work.
Observation shows that three out of the four individuals switched parties in hopes of gaining loyalty from the ruling party. This is the fifth point of my observation. Respondent A, Respondent B, and Respondent C all gained loyalty from the ruling party and continued to perform tasks for the government and the people.
Again, observation also tries to show both pro-government and anti-government party switching. In the case of pro-government switching, it had a negative impact on voters. Voters did not look favourably upon party-switchers, as seen in the current positions of Respondent A and Respondent C. Both switched to the Trinamool Congress in 2016 and retained their positions unopposed in the 2018 elections because no nominations were filed by the opposition (the opposition was not allowed to submit nominations). However, in the 2023 elections, they participated, and the elections were conducted fairly, where both lost their positions. Similarly, Respondent B, due to his party switch, lost the trust of voters in his area and had to contest elections in another region.
These examples suggest that defection is often strategic, with local leaders weighing political futures against party loyalty. As scholar Chanchal Kumar Sharma (2012) notes, defections in India frequently coincide with shifts in political power, particularly when one party becomes dominant at the state level.
Legal and Institutional Responses:
Despite the clarity of Section 213A of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, there is scant evidence of consistent enforcement. In most Domkal cases, no disqualification proceedings were initiated, even when public complaints were made. This aligns with findings by Mitra and Singh (2020), who argue that anti-defection provisions at the Panchayat level are frequently neutralized by political interference and administrative inertia.
Further, the adjudicatory process is often compromised. When the authority to decide on disqualification is vested in political functionaries, such as the Sabhadhipati, the process lacks impartiality. A report by the West Bengal State Election Commission (2022) observed that cases of defection were rarely escalated or resolved transparently, especially in districts with high ruling-party control.
Voter Response and Democratic Consequences:
Public reaction to defection varies. Some interviewees reported that their constituents supported their decision, especially if it meant improved access to welfare schemes. Others, however, faced criticism and eventual defeat in the next election cycle.
Field observations and local newspaper reports (Anandabazar Patrika, 13.08.2023) show that voters in Domkal are acutely aware of political manoeuvrings. Yet, due to economic dependency on state programs, some accept defection as a tactical necessity rather than a betrayal. This creates a political culture where ideology is subordinate to pragmatism.
As political theorist Christophe Jaffrelot (2003) has argued, Indian democracy often oscillates between clientelism and ideological politics, particularly at the grassroots level. In Domkal, this tension is clearly visible, where personal relationships and service delivery outweigh party allegiance.
Ideology vs. Self-interest: Evidence from Domkal:
While some defectors claimed ideological disillusionment as the reason for switching, deeper interviews revealed motivations grounded in personal survival, influence, and protection from harassment. For example, one respondent who moved from CPI(M) to AITC cited the party’s waning influence and limited organizational support as reasons.
This aligns with Kanchan Chandra’s (2004) theory of “patronage democracy,” which posits that politicians act not based on ideology but on the ability to maintain client networks. In this context, ideology becomes a rhetorical tool rather than a genuine motivation.
Challenges in Enforcement:
Beyond individual motivations, structural factors severely limit the anti-defection law’s utility. Bureaucratic delays, politicized adjudication, and lack of civic awareness all contribute to a culture of impunity. Interviews with local bureaucrats revealed reluctance to act against ruling party defectors for fear of political backlash.
Moreover, no standardized reporting system exists to track defections at the Panchayat level. As per the Ministry of Panchayati Raj (2021), state reports on Panchayat functioning do not include defection data, making it difficult to identify patterns or pursue accountability.
Concluding Remarks:
In conclusion, it can be said that this chapter highlights that despite the ideological differences among political parties in India, ideological differences do not have any significant impact on political defection. This chapter also attempts to explain what political defection means. Furthermore, it sheds light on the various measures taken over time to protect Indian politics from the negative effects of political defection, as well as the process of passing anti-defection laws. The chapter also examines how political defection harms the democratic process. Despite the existence of anti-defection laws, instances of defection continue to occur even at the national level, and some examples are provided. In addition to India, information related to the state of West Bengal and Murshidabad district is also discussed, with a particular focus on the four political defectors from the Domkal block in Murshidabad district. The chapter explores their issues, which are found to be similar to those of other defectors. It is shown that political defection is a common phenomenon throughout India. However, a different picture emerges in the case of anti-government party switching. Despite Respondent D switching parties against the government, the public still trusted him and elected him. In this case, perhaps his personality played a more significant role than the party switch.
References:
1. Basu D.D, “Introduction to The Constitution of India”, prentice-hall of India Pvt, (Ltd)
2. Brase, Paul.R. (1994) Politics in India Since Independence. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
3. Chauhan, K. S. (1996). Problems of Defection in Indian Constitution: A study of emerging trend. Maharshi Dayanand University.
4. Defection from Development. (1968). Economic and Political Weekly, 3(1/2), 5–9.
5. Diwan Paras, “Aya Ram Gaya Ram: The Politics of Defection”(1979)21 JIL 129
6. Gehlot, N. S. (1991). The Anti-Defection Act, 1985 And The Role Of The Speaker. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 52(3), 327–340.
7. Hassan Md Ali (1985) ‘Defection and Party Politics in Bihar’. Lalit Narayan Mithila University.
8. Jaffrelot,C.(2003). Indias silent revolution: The rise of the lower castes in North India. Hurst/Columbia University Press.
Kamath P.M. (1980) Politics of Defection in India in the 1980s
9. Kashyap, S (1970). The Politics of Defection: The Changing Contours of The Political Power Structure in State Politics in India. Asian Survey, 10(3), 195-208
10. Kishore, P. K. (2019). Politics of Defection: A Case Study of Telangana State
11. Koholi, Atul (1990) Indian Democracy and the Crisis of Governability. New York, Cambridge University Press.
12. Sardar, Lohit (2017) ‘A Comprehensive Analysis of Anti Defection Law- A Reformatory Approach’. Guahati University.
13. Robin, S, James (1997) Introduction: Democracy and Elections. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs,21(1) Winter/spring, 1-13.
14. West Bengal State Election Commission (https://www.portal.wbsec.org)
19. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/etela-rajender-bjp-trs-telangana-7357969/
26. https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/bengal-youth-cong-chief-to-join-trinamool-today/
30. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/east/story/mala-roy-trinamool-congress-tmc-congress-kmc-councillor-mamata-banerjee-243306-2015-03-07
35. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/west-bengal/story/shatrughan-sinha-joins-tmc-bjp-1925487-2022-03-15