Listen to this article:

New Delhi: The Election Commission of India (ECI) has released statistics related to the just-concluded Tamil Nadu assembly election and first phase of the West Bengal election. It said West Bengal recorded 91.78% turnout in Phase 1. In Tamil Nadu, the ECI reported a turnout of 84.69%. It described this turnout as the highest since independence for both states.

The statistics the ECI has released highlight the change in voter participation rates in both states since 1951 for Lok Sabha and assembly polls. However, the commission has not shared constituency-wise details of actual voter participation in either of the elections conducted today, in the ongoing election cycle.

This table provided by the Election Commission on Thursday (April 23, 2026) after elections in West Bengal and Tamil Nadu shows details of the electorate, polling stations, staff, candidates and agents, but not constituency-wise turnout figures. However, the ECI’s mobile app shares constituency-wise voting percentages, which can only be computed (or estimated) if actuals exist.

The commission’s press release directs citizens to the ECI’s mobile app for “District-wise and AC wise approximate voter turnout figures”. But even on the app, the actual figures – how many voted in each assembly seat – have not been shared.

No voter numbers are provided that would help assess regional or demographic variations or patterns in voter turnout or behaviour.

The press release of the commission says: “Presiding Officers updated the polling percentage on ECINET at the close of poll before leaving the polling station as per ECI’s latest instructions resulting in minimal delay in updation of the polling trends.”

A high percentage turnout, in isolation, does not capture changes in the underlying electorate. This is highly significant in the case of West Bengal, where the Election Commission carried out special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The exercise was meant to weed out ineligible voters, and was carried out in Tamil Nadu and in other states as well. However, the processes and rules the Election Commissioned followed varied vastly in Bengal than elsewhere – at least 90 lakh voters were struck off the rolls, while 27 lakh tried to get back on voter lists, most of them failing.

Former Chief Election Commissioner of India S.Y. Quraishi has tried to explain the reason for the high voter turnout seen in West Bengal as well as Tamil Nadu in a few posts on X. On the Bengal figure of close to 92% turnout, he said:

People speculating on unprecedented 92 % voter turnout. This figure would have been 83% if 7 million had not been deleted. — Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

People speculating on unprecedented 92 % voter turnout. This figure would have been 83% if 7 million had not been deleted.

— Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

Gilles Verniers, a researcher at Sciences Po, Paris, whose focus areas are India and data, said on X that Quraishi’s finding was “consistent with” trends in voter turnout in Bengal since the mid-2000s.

Which is consistent with turnout levels in West Bengal since the mid-2000s. https://t.co/eB5sUeYpG9 pic.twitter.com/7DsRD1vA0j — Gilles Verniers (@GillesVerniers) April 23, 2026

Which is consistent with turnout levels in West Bengal since the mid-2000s. https://t.co/eB5sUeYpG9 pic.twitter.com/7DsRD1vA0j

— Gilles Verniers (@GillesVerniers) April 23, 2026

Verniers shared a table on voter turnout patters in West Bengal since 1962 and until 2021, which is below. It records an overall rise in voter participation in the state since the 1962 election, with dips in a few years in the middle. (This also implies that most of the figures the ECI is sharing with the country are already available to the public.)

Quraishi said that the ECI must disclose exactly how many people voted in the elections in both states. He revealed that the commission has a simple procedure to “count” how many voted. That procedure, his tweet indicates, is routine within election administration, though it might be unknown to most others.

ECI must announce how many voters were in the que at 6 pm. Exact numbers are known, polling station wise, as numbered chits are distributed at the end of polling. The last person in Q is numbered 1 so that no new person can join. @ECISVEEP — Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

ECI must announce how many voters were in the que at 6 pm. Exact numbers are known, polling station wise, as numbered chits are distributed at the end of polling. The last person in Q is numbered 1 so that no new person can join. @ECISVEEP

— Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

In Tamil Nadu, as in West Bengal, the data the EC has shared is primarily in percentage terms. Around 71 lakh voters were removed in the final electoral roll after the SIR exercise in the state, down from nearly 97 lakh deletions in the draft stage. (Overall deletions in Tamil Nadu are higher than in Bengal, but that is also because the entire state voted in one phase on April 23 and it has a much larger electorate, while West Bengal has a smaller electorate and another phase of voting scheduled on April 29 – when the next set of deleted voters will be unable to vote).

The trend of sharing percentage figures, as opposed to actual numbers, can be explained by how much more impressive voting patterns can appear this way. Even if the overall voter count lowers in a constituency, the percentage can rise. Quraishi explained this on Thursday evening in the context of Tamil Nadu’s high-seeming voter turnout, put out by the election commission.

In Tamil Nadu, turnout would be 71% if there were no deletions of 71 lakhs. — Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

In Tamil Nadu, turnout would be 71% if there were no deletions of 71 lakhs.

— Dr. S.Y. Quraishi (@DrSYQuraishi) April 23, 2026

Since the commission has not released district-wise or assembly-level turnout in absolute terms, what is available publicly is an aggregate percentage – at least for now. Also, the ECI claimed that district-wise and assembly constituency-wise turnout figures are available on its ECINET platform (an app). But these, too, are labelled “approximate” figures, are merely percentages, and are not broken down into detailed voter counts.

A screenshot of the ECI’s app taken at 22:52 hrs on April 23, 2026. Each page is watermarked with ‘approximate trend’, and only percentage figures for West Bengal and Tamil Nadu constituencies are provided – not the figures that would have been the basis for these computations.

This denies the public scrutiny over electoral processes that existed in previous election cycles, which were demanded from the ECI through prolonged court battles. A 2019 petition by the Association for Democratic Reforms, revived during the 2024 Lok Sabha election, sought disclosure of booth-level turnout data (Form 17C), but the Supreme Court declined interim relief, leaving the question of granular electoral transparency open.

Thirdly, the denial of actual figures is a break from the past that remains unexplained. Earlier, percentages of registered voters who actually voted were often computed by poll enthusiasts – the actuals were provided by the commission. Now it is the reverse, percentages are freely offered, but not the data that is the basis to arrive at them.

© The Wire