Ten demands were placed before the Supreme Court on Monday through a petition filed by opposition figures from the INDIA Bloc, with two of the requests centring on a pause to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and corrective action over alleged irregularities in the voting process.

Court filings indexed on the Supreme Court's official docket identify the matter as Rahul Gandhi v. Before Gandhi arrived at the court that evening, the Congress legal team had already submitted the petition to the Election Commission of India. Because Rahul was unable to reach the court before the 4.30 pm cutoff, advocate S Prasanna stepped in to submit the petition on his behalf.

At the heart of the petition's prayer for relief lie ten separate remedies, each one anchored in the Special Intensive Revision process and in orders attributed to the Election Commission of India. A joint petition was filed after Chief Justice Surya Kant, heading India's apex court, communicated on Sunday that an audience with Rahul Gandhi would not take place, given that the underlying matters are currently before the courts for adjudication.

Filed through the courts, the petition calls on the Election Commission of India to hand over the full documentary record tied to the SIR — covering internal agreements, meeting minutes, files, and any noted objections. Among the records requested are ECINET and ERONET access logs, along with internal file notings tied to the decision that set the exercise in motion on 24 June 2025.

The petition asks a court to assess whether the contested rulings align with Article 324, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, along with the constitutional principles established through earlier Supreme Court decisions, among them Seshan v. A 1995 ruling involving the Union of India stands as the applicable precedent in this matter. The petition further seeks the quashing of any rulings made without the backing of valid legal authority.

The petition also calls for accountability measures targeting individuals found responsible for breaches of constitutional or statutory rules governing how electoral rolls are drawn up and updated, while requesting that courts invoke Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, in cases where that provision applies. The petition further requests that the digital Form 6 align with the version set out under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and holds that any alterations to it go through the established rule-amendment procedure rather than being introduced informally.

Among the remedies sought in the petition is the formation of an oversight panel drawn from retired Supreme Court judiciary, technical specialists, and prominent public figures, operating without government interference. Tasked with scrutinising voter-roll deletions and amendments carried out during the SIR period, the panel would also examine who accessed the database and what changes were recorded. Among the panel's additional responsibilities would be scrutinising the technical blueprints, structural frameworks, operational procedures, and governing protocols that underpin how Electronic Voting Machines are built, managed, and put into service.

Among the items sought through the petition are polling-booth-level records of voters removed during the SIR, the grounds cited for each removal, and a breakdown of those removed names by both age and gender. The petition also includes a demand for a workable process through which the names of qualified voters can be reinstated on the rolls.

The procedural safeguards sought by the opposition would bar any removal of a voter's registration entry unless the individual first receives the legally mandated notice and a fair chance to respond. Filed with the court, the petition calls for a halt to the ongoing SIR across every state until each of the raised concerns has been examined and resolved.

Beyond the removal or adjustment of orders already sought, the filing urges the Supreme Court to exercise whatever further authority it holds to safeguard both the integrity of elections and the right of every qualified voter to cast a ballot.