A new political data analysis has identified 111 sitting Members of Parliament and state legislators who changed political parties after winning elections between 2022 and 2026.
The analysis was published by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch on September 24, 2026. It covers elections and by-elections held during the period and examines cases recorded up to July 12, 2026.
Editorial Insight
Key Highlights
Important points readers should notice.
Issue/Event: ADR identifies 111 sitting MPs and MLAs who changed political parties after being elected.
Period: Elections and by-elections from 2022 to 2026, with data covered up to July 12, 2026.
Authority/Organisation: Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch.
Break-up: 26 Lok Sabha MPs, 7 Rajya Sabha MPs and 78 MLAs.
Geographic Spread: Cases identified across 17 states and Union Territories, with Nagaland recording 32 and West Bengal 20.
According to the report, the 111 cases comprise 26 Lok Sabha MPs, seven Rajya Sabha MPs and 78 MLAs.
ADR has classified the cases into four different categories rather than treating every party change as the same type of political defection.
These categories include an individual switch or defection without resigning from the House, a formal party merger, resignation followed by joining another party and winning a by-election, and disqualification followed by joining another party and subsequently winning a by-election.
Editorial Analysis
Why This Matters
The analysis provides a data-based view of political party changes among elected representatives during a period covering parliamentary elections, state elections and by-elections. It also highlights the importance of distinguishing between different types of political transitions. A legislator joining another party without resigning, a formal party merger and a resignation followed by a by-election can involve different constitutional and electoral processes. The report therefore adds data to the broader discussion around political representation, party allegiance and the functioning of the anti-defection framework.
Nagaland Records Highest Number of Cases
The analysis identified party-switching cases across 17 states and Union Territories.
Nagaland recorded the highest number of cases at 32, representing about 29% of the 111 cases. West Bengal followed with 20 cases, or about 18%.
The report also recorded cases in Telangana, Punjab, Goa and several other states.
The figures represent cases identified by ADR and National Election Watch during the period covered by their analysis. They should not be interpreted as a complete official count of every political party change in India.
ADR has specifically stated that there is no systematically maintained and readily accessible official dataset covering all such cases. The organisation therefore cautioned that other relevant cases may not be included in its analysis.
Which Parties Had the Most Representatives Leave?
The report also examined the parties from which the legislators originally elected later changed political affiliation.
Representatives originally elected from the Nationalist Democratic Progressive Party (NDPP) accounted for 25 of the identified cases, followed by the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) with 20 and the Indian National Congress (INC) with 19.
The report recorded nine cases involving the BRS, seven each involving the AAP and NCP, six involving Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), five involving JD(U) and four involving the NPP.
ADR said representatives originally elected from NDPP, AITC and INC together accounted for 64 of the 111 cases, or about 58% of the total identified cases.
These figures describe the parties from which the representatives originally won their seats. They do not by themselves establish why individual legislators changed parties or whether a particular move violated the anti-defection provisions.
What the Report Says About Political Defections
The analysis comes amid continuing debate over the functioning of India's anti-defection framework under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.
However, the 111 cases cannot be treated as a single category of legal defection. Some involved individual party switching, while others involved mergers, resignations followed by fresh elections or disqualification followed by a subsequent by-election.
ADR also noted that recent changes in the composition of some state assemblies have been associated with defections by legislators. This is presented in the report as an observation about developments in certain state assemblies, rather than a finding that every party switch caused a government change.
