India
oi-Madhuri Adnal
The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave petitioners 10 days to respond to the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) defence of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The pleas seek the suspension of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the voter list revision exercise, amid opposition allegations of ‘vote chori’.
A three judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana also issued notice to the Election Commission on all the petitions, including one filed by Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders. The matter is expected to come up for hearing again on November 17.
The Supreme Court granted petitioners 10 days to reply to the Election Commission’s defense of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The ECI rejected alleged irregularities, asserting all decisions were unanimous and Form 6 was unchanged.
The latest development follows the ECI’s affidavit filed on Monday, in which it defended the nationwide SIR exercise and rejected allegations of irregularities. The Commission maintained that all decisions relating to the revision were taken unanimously by its three members. It also denied claims that Form 6, which is used to register new voters, had been altered.
In its 248 page counter affidavit, the Election Commission described the allegations as “misconceived” and urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the petitions.
The poll body said the SIR orders issued on June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026, were approved unanimously in accordance with Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
The Commission also addressed questions about differences of opinion among its members. It said that comments, suggestions or queries raised by a commissioner while examining a file should not be treated as a final decision by the Commission.
According to the affidavit, files are examined by one election commissioner, followed by the second commissioner and then the CEC. Decisions approved by the Commission carry the signatures of all three members. In urgent cases where the commissioners cannot meet in person, approval can be obtained electronically and formally recorded on the file later, the ECI said.
The petitions were filed after a report by The Indian Express alleged differences among Election Commission members over the SIR exercise. Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders subsequently approached the Supreme Court, raising concerns over the revision process and seeking Kumar’s suspension.
The Supreme Court had earlier sought the poll body’s response to the pleas. In its latest affidavit, the ECI rejected the allegations and maintained that the decisions concerning the SIR exercise were taken through the prescribed procedure.
