Supreme Court issues notice to Election Commission on Rahul Gandhi's plea
A demand for a time-bound investigation has been made against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar for unilateral decisions.
The Supreme Court issued notices on Thursday to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and all three election commissioners, including the Chief Election Commissioner, regarding a petition demanding an independent investigation into the functioning of the commission and electoral irregularities. This petition has been filed by 13 leaders of the India alliance, including Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi.
According to a report by Bar and Bench, the petition alleges that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has made several unilateral decisions and demands a time-bound inquiry. The opposition leaders have also called for the suspension of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process of the voter list until the investigation is completed.
The bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Joymalya Bagchi heard the case. However, the bench issued a preliminary notice regarding co-petitioner Mahua Manjhi, leader of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM).
The court expressed objections to some statements made by Mahua Manjhi, stating that she would need to clarify her statements and conduct. The bench clarified, “Respondent number 9 will have to explain her statements and conduct.”
This petition has been filed by Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders of the India alliance. It raises questions about the transparency of the Election Commission's functioning and adherence to constitutional provisions.
The petitioners allege that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has made several important decisions alone, while the Election Commission is a three-member constitutional body and decisions are supposed to be made by consensus.
Opposition leaders argue that the prominent role of a single member in the collective decision-making process of the commission raises questions about compliance with constitutional and legal provisions. The petition demands an independent and time-bound investigation into these allegations to clarify whether the commission's decisions were made in accordance with established procedures.
This petition has been filed at a time when opposition parties are continuously raising questions about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list.
The background of filing the petition also includes a request for a meeting with the Chief Justice by Rahul Gandhi and Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge. Both leaders had requested to meet the CJI to discuss their concerns regarding the SIR process and the functioning of the Election Commission. However, the Chief Justice did not meet them and indicated that these issues could be raised through appropriate judicial proceedings.
Subsequently, Rahul Gandhi, along with others, personally reached the Supreme Court registry on Monday to file the petition. During this time, Kharge and other leaders of the India alliance were also present. A large number of common people participated in this march from Barakhamba Road to the Supreme Court, led by leaders and workers of the India alliance.
On Monday, a sea of people surged onto the streets of Delhi. This initiative by opposition leaders is being viewed as a united political stance against the functioning of the Election Commission.
However, the process of filing the petition was initially stalled due to objections from the registry. The registry pointed out 14 deficiencies in the petition, including a shortfall of ₹220 in court fees, an unclear photocopy of Mallikarjun Kharge's identification, and the absence of vakalatnamas for nine petitioners.
The petitioners have clarified that they are not seeking to reopen the Supreme Court's earlier decision that upheld the validity of the SIR in Bihar. Their demand is for the court to investigate whether the various decisions taken during the implementation of the SIR were in accordance with the constitutional and legal safeguards.
The petition states that it is essential to protect the rights of eligible voters in the process of preparing and amending the voter list. Opposition leaders have alleged that there is a risk of eligible voters being excluded without adequate information, hearings, and effective arrangements for restoring the names of those removed from the voter list.
The petition references a report by The Indian Express. According to the report, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected to Gyanesh Kumar's unilateral decisions on 14 occasions over a period of 10 months.
Opposition leaders have demanded that the Supreme Court direct the submission of complete files related to the disputed decisions, meeting agendas, official comments, and objections recorded by both election commissioners. This includes documents related to the decision to start the SIR in June 2025. The petitioners believe that examining these documents will clarify the process by which decisions were made within the commission and whether all members had sufficient opportunity to express their opinions.
The petition also calls for the formation of an independent committee headed by a retired judge of the Supreme Court. The proposed committee is said to include technical experts and members of civil society.
This committee would investigate the decisions, policies, procedures of the Election Commission, and the technical arrangements related to electronic voting machines (EVMs). Additionally, the petition raises questions about legal changes in Form-6 without amending the Voter Registration Rules, 1960.
The petition expresses concern over the centralized operation of databases related to the voter list through ECINET and ERONET. Opposition leaders have stated that there should be transparency and an effective grievance redressal mechanism in the process of removing or amending names from the voter list.
The opposition leaders argue that the independence of the Election Commission and the collective decision-making process are essential for free and fair elections. According to them, these principles are part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The petition demands appropriate action against those responsible for violations of constitutional or legal provisions related to the preparation and revision of the electoral rolls.
Filed through advocate S. Prasanna, this petition names the Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi as respondents. The court's further proceedings and the response to be presented by the Election Commission will now be closely monitored.