The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday issued formal notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) in response to a petition filed by Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition, and nine other leaders of the INDIA Bloc. The petition contests the ECI’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, alleging procedural irregularities and seeking a range of remedial orders.
Background of the SIR Exercise
The SIR exercise, launched by the Election Commission on June 24, 2025, is intended to clean up voter lists across the country. Opposition parties, led by the Congress‑affiliated INDIA Bloc, have repeatedly protested the process, claiming that it has resulted in the deletion of legitimate voters without adequate notice or justification. The petitioners have also demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, arguing that the alleged irregularities undermine the credibility of the electoral roll revision.
In addition to the Gandhi‑led petition, the Supreme Court has taken up separate pleas filed by Asaduddin Owaisi, chief of the All India Majlis‑e‑Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), and Digvijaya Singh, a senior Congress leader. All three matters are now before the Court for judicial scrutiny.
Supreme Court Proceedings and Notice
A two‑judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued the notice. The notice was addressed to the Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and the other Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. During the hearing, Chief Justice Kant remarked orally, “We would also ask one of the petitioners about his conduct,” underscoring the Court’s intent to examine the petitioners’ actions as part of the proceedings.
On Monday, October 12, Rahul Gandhi and several opposition leaders marched toward the Supreme Court with the intention of presenting the petition in person. The Supreme Court Registry, however, was scheduled to close before the petition could be filed, prompting the petitioners to submit the documents through their counsel, Advocate on Record S. Prasanna. After the filing, the leaders entered the Registry area, resulting in a large gathering of supporters and a brief commotion within the Court precincts.
Prior to the filing, Gandhi and Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, who serves as the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, sought a private audience with Chief Justice Kant to submit a memorandum and request the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Kumar. The Chief Justice declined the meeting, stating that the issues raised were already before the Court and that the judiciary could not intervene in the administrative functions of the government. He clarified that the petitioners remained free to pursue relief through the judicial process.
The Court has scheduled further hearings on matters related to the SIR exercise for the following day. Chief Justice Kant indicated that any additional petitions filed by the opposition could be considered alongside the pending cases.
Reliefs Sought by the Petitioners
The petition outlines an extensive list of reliefs aimed at ensuring transparency, accountability, and compliance with constitutional and statutory provisions. Key demands include:
- Production of the complete file relating to the ECI’s decision to launch the SIR on June 24, 2025.
- An examination of whether the SIR decisions conform to Article 324 of the Constitution, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, and the principles established in the landmark T.N. Seshan judgment. The petition seeks to quash any decisions taken without lawful authority.
- A directive that every SIR‑related decision be taken collectively, properly minuted, and in accordance with Section 18 of the 2023 Act while the case is pending.
- Ensuring that the online Form 6 used for voter registration complies with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, unless those rules are amended.
- The constitution of a committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to audit SIR deletions, review access to electoral‑roll databases, and assess electronic voting machine (EVM) processes against global best practices.
- Mandatory booth‑wise publication of the names of voters deleted during the SIR, together with reasons for deletion, and age‑ and gender‑wise breakdowns. The petition also calls for a functional mechanism to restore erroneously deleted names.
- A requirement that no voter’s name be deleted without prior notice and an opportunity to be heard, along with a provision allowing eligible individuals in Punjab and other poll‑bound states to apply for inclusion until the final date for such applications.
- Suspension of the SIR exercise across all states until the petition is adjudicated.
The petition therefore seeks both documentary disclosure and structural reforms to the SIR process, arguing that such measures are essential to safeguard the fundamental right to vote and to maintain public confidence in the electoral system.
As the Supreme Court proceeds with hearings, the outcome of these petitions could have significant implications for the conduct of future elections, the functioning of the Election Commission, and the broader relationship between India’s political parties and its constitutional institutions.
Be First to Comment