Unconfirmed accounts indicate that an approach by Congress figures Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge — seeking a face-to-face meeting with Chief Justice Surya Kant before the INDIA bloc's planned Supreme Court march on Monday, 12 October — did not go through. Gandhi, heading the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and Kharge, holding the same position in the Rajya Sabha, had sought a window of 4 pm to 5 pm in which to deliver a written memorandum raising concerns about alleged electoral irregularities.

Four demands took shape among opposition figures: an end to what they described as irregularities in the voting process, the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar from his post, suspension of the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, and a switch away from electronic voting machines back to paper ballots.

An email carried the Chief Justice's reply to both leaders, according to available sources. Those matters had already been placed before the Supreme Court for consideration, rendering a meeting at that point procedurally untimely. According to that document, the judiciary's administrative authority did not extend to overseeing or directing the operations of the executive branch. Rights-related grievances of a fundamental nature, the officials were told, had an existing court pathway available for their resolution.

Notice of the ruling reached relevant parties just one day ahead of a march the Opposition had organised, with the stated purpose of delivering a memorandum in person to the Chief Justice. Gandhi's proposal called for a gathering at the Supreme Court on 12 October, bringing together opposition figures, representatives from civil society, and young people.

The planned protest sits within a broader push by the INDIA bloc to draw attention to what the alliance describes as irregularities in how electoral rolls have been revised and how the Election Commission of India has been conducting its work. Two demands advanced together from the Opposition benches — one targeting Kumar's continued tenure, the other aimed at halting the SIR exercise altogether. A push toward paper-based voting has also been put forward, alongside a position that the electoral process should be subject to greater openness and accountability measures.

Allegations that the electoral process was interfered with remain contested, with the Election Commission maintaining that its conduct throughout has followed established legal and statutory frameworks. Allegations have surfaced that voter registration rolls were unlawfully purged and that the SIR procedure was administered in a manner that drew doubts about neutrality during the voting process. Rival parties have lodged formal complaints alleging that the Election Commission has tilted procedures in the BJP's direction, a dispute that has deepened the broader standoff surrounding the voter-roll revision process.

Scrutiny around the matter deepened after documentation emerged showing that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi put forward objections on repeated occasions across a ten-month span, with those concerns centred primarily on decisions tied to the SIR process. Divergences in viewpoint during internal deliberations are a normal part of the process, the Election Commission has noted, adding that its rulings rest on established legal grounds.

Ahead of the planned march, the Opposition's effort to bring its concerns directly before the Chief Justice encountered an obstacle when the requested meeting did not go ahead. That informal reply from the Chief Justice, as reported, leaves open a path for the party leaders to pursue formal relief through the Supreme Court on questions touching electoral processes and fundamental rights. A march has been arranged at a point when the SIR exercise, calls for Kumar's departure from office, and a police response to demonstrators in Delhi have all contributed to a charged political atmosphere.