On December 31, 1926, King George V announced that the new imperial capital built around the Raisina Hills would be called New Delhi, pushing the city’s older name, Dilli, into the background. A hundred years later, another naming debate has returned to the national capital. Praveen Khandelwal of the BJP, who represents Chandni Chowk in the Lok Sabha, wrote recently to the Union home minister proposing that the capital be renamed Indraprastha, an ancient city linked to the Mahabharata era.
If 1926 reflected the confidence of the British Empire, the latest naming debate comes at a time when the country’s power centre is being rebuilt again, including at a symbolic level. An earlier push to use the name Bharat instead of India did not take place through legislation but has grown through regular use in official speeches and government communication. Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month criticised another colonial-era influence, the education system introduced by Thomas Babington Macaulay. He said India should focus more on native languages before the Macaulay education system completes 200 years in 2035.
The Modi government is, meanwhile, speeding up the shift from Delhi’s long-standing power centres such as North Block and South Block to new administrative buildings. A new high-security prime minister’s office is also taking shape, which will be called Seva Tirth. It seems the Modi government is keen to reframe the country’s administrative identity completely.
India’s political system is vast and complex, and in 2026, two major processes will matter most. One is the ongoing special intensive revision of electoral rolls. The other is Census 2027. Both will affect how politics is conducted, how voters are counted, how policies are made and how power is shared in the coming years. In fact, they may redefine the identity of an Indian, which existed but was never articulated.
One of these processes has already shown its political impact. In Bihar, the revised voter list resulted in a one-sided mandate. Opposition parties alleged vote stealing, but the ruling Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance received more votes than expected and scored an impressive win in the assembly polls. The mandate for the National Democratic Alliance may be in line with the one it got earlier this year in Delhi, as the electorate voted out Arvind Kejriwal, who caved in under the burden of his own image after the government allegedly spent over Rs30 crore on his official residence.
Fighting spirit: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin at the ‘Voter Adhikar Yatra’ in Bihar | PTI
In Bihar, the opposition believed that conditions were favourable. Nitish was seen as ageing and facing health issues and was in power for nearly 20 years, fuelling anti-incumbency. The SIR exercise created anxiety among voters over the fear of being disenfranchised. Rahul Gandhi rallied other INDIA bloc leaders behind him, not just from Bihar but even from other states like Tamil Nadu to support his charge. However, voters in Bihar chose the very people who were accused of stealing their votes.
This forced political analysts to rethink the verdict and look closely at the poll process. Amid allegations of voter manipulation stood two key factors. One was the Rs10,000 assistance to women voters, who formed the backbone of Nitish’s support base. A deeper look also highlighted the importance of political organisation. The BJP, backed by RSS volunteers, had spent years building booth-level committees. This groundwork, followed by active outreach by the JD(U)-BJP government, helped shape the outcome. This was apparent when the Election Commission asked political parties to come forward with objections over the exercise. Most parties did not have enough functionaries to cover all booths.
Voters ultimately supported parties they believed could deliver results. Faced with a choice between delivery and promises, they chose delivery.
That brings us to the other exercise that will shape India’s future. The first phase of Census 2027 will be held from April to September 2026. This phase will record the number of houses, basic facilities such as electricity and water and assets like vehicles. The data will show how living conditions have changed since the last census in 2011, and could give the BJP a chance to claim that its rule over the last 11 years has changed the fortunes of Indians.
Leading the charge: West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee at the Trinamool Congress protest against the SIR process in Kolkata | Salil Bera
The second phase of the Census, involving population enumeration, is planned for February 2027. This data forms the basis of government policies. It will record details such as age, gender, education, religion, language, caste, occupation, migration and fertility. This phase will also include a caste census, which has not been conducted since 1931. The results are expected to influence future debates on caste and representation. This is the part that every political party, sociologist and ethnographer will be keenly interested in. Will the caste census perpetuate caste identities or push larger demands for reservation when actual numbers reveal the composition of different castes? Could a new wave of protests begin, like the Gujjars or Marathas demanding more reservation after the caste census?
The census will lead to a redrawing of India’s political map as the delimitation exercise kicks in, largely based on population. Will the North gain more seats as it has a larger population than the South, which followed family planning policies? Will the balance of power shift northwards as the Hindi heartland alone decides who rules from Delhi? These debates may grow stronger in the coming months.
The year 2026 may reignite identity debates.
The SIR is underway in several states, and in poll-bound West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu it may influence election results. The contest in West Bengal is expected to be the most polarising. The SIR exercise includes identifying illegal immigrants and foreigners, which has become a major political issue. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has strongly opposed the process.
Similar concerns exist in Tamil Nadu and Kerala, both ruled by non-BJP and non-Congress parties. For anti-BJP parties, the SIR is a new challenge they have not dealt with before, but there is no escape.
In West Bengal, Mamata’s women-focused welfare schemes helped her in the elections. Rural infrastructure projects and the state’s cultural identity have also strengthened her support base. However, as 2026 begins, renewed political debate around building a new mosque modelled on Babri Masjid and a temple modelled on Ayodhya’s Ram Mandir in the state has the potential to make the elections much more intense than before.
Mamata had defied critics by winning a historic third term, even as the BJP expanded its footprint. West Bengal remains the only state in eastern India where the BJP has not been part of the government.
For the BJP, winning West Bengal is a prestige battle, as Mamata has so far blocked its rise to power. In neighbouring Assam, the Congress hopes to perform better against Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. Sarma’s strong focus on hindutva politics has made him a key figure in the BJP. In Assam, politics centres on identity, with campaigns focused on removing illegal Bangladeshi immigrants and promoting Assamese pride.
In Tamil Nadu, M.K. Stalin is seeking a second term in the absence of a strong opposition. However, political churn caused by the entry of actor Vijay could affect alliances. Stalin’s government has focused on continuity, with welfare delivery, social justice and state autonomy as its main pillars. The BJP is trying to expand its presence but has not displaced the long-standing Dravidian polity. It is now working closely with its senior partner, the AIADMK.
In Kerala, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan of the CPI(M)-led left alliance faces a strong challenge from both the Congress-led alliance and the NDA. The left relies on public health services, education institutions and strong party organisation. However, the December local body elections showed significant gains for the Congress-led UDF and the NDA.
The Bihar election was also good news for the BJP’s allies. The JD(U) and Chirag Paswan’s Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) made significant gains. Nitish’s continued relevance lies in his ability to combine governance with political survival. This contrasts with Odisha’s Naveen Patnaik, who lost power in the 2024 assembly elections after voters sensed leadership fatigue following an uninterrupted reign of 24 years. Herein lies the message. Across states, a similar pattern is visible. Voters increasingly seek clear leadership and the ability to deliver.
The BJP has recovered after setbacks in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, but maintaining this position is not without challenges. After delays in naming a new party president, leading to discussion about leadership changes, particularly around succession planning when Modi demits office, the party has named Nitin Nabin, minister and five-term MLA from Bihar, as its new working president.
Modi faces no immediate political challenge. The government is hopeful that global trade pressures, including tariff issues, will ease. Among supporters, Modi continues to be seen as a decisive leader, but challenges with neighbours and the economy persist. For the opposition, recent elections have shown the limits of relying mainly on speeches and narratives without strong local organisation and regular engagement with voters.
Indians love a good fight and may support an underdog, provided he is consistent in his approach rather than mounting a challenge only near the polls.