A petition lodged at the Supreme Court on Monday by eleven opposition figures — Rahul Gandhi among them — places the validity of the Election Commission of India's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls under judicial scrutiny.
The petition centres on three interlocked demands: that the ECI release its internal records on the Special Intensive Revision process, that an outside body be appointed to examine how voter deletions were conducted, and that the revision exercise be suspended across all states pending resolution of those concerns.
The petition further contends that Gyanesh Kumar, in his role as Chief Election Commissioner, took actions and exercised authority without the awareness or sign-off of fellow commissioners. Ten separate directions are laid out in the petition as the relief being sought from the court.
Among the materials sought are internal ECI documents — spanning working files, meeting minutes, recorded notings, and objections raised by Election Commissioners over contested SIR decisions — together with access logs drawn from both ECINET and ERONET.
Among the other items requested is the full documentation of the 24 June 2025 ruling authorising a nationwide SIR rollout, a review of whether Article 324 and Section 18 of the 2023 CEC Act were properly observed, and accountability measures directed at those found to have violated those provisions.
Among the proposals put forward is the formation of an oversight panel — chaired by a retired Supreme Court judge — tasked with examining deletions from the Special Intensive Revision rolls and benchmarking Electronic Voting Machine procedures against standards observed internationally.
Among the points raised in the petition is a dispute over a revision made to online Form 6, which introduced a new declaration field relating to prior SIR rolls. Where the ECI maintains that the apex court validated this requirement, the court itself indicated the matter had not been placed before it for consideration.
The petition called for online Form 6 to align with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, absent any amendment to those rules.
Among the additional demands contained in the petition are booth-level disclosure of removed voter names, the grounds cited for each removal, a breakdown by gender and age, and a working mechanism through which deleted entries can be reinstated.
The petition further states that voter rolls in Punjab and other states heading to the polls will not lose any registered name through a removal carried out without prior notice and a formal hearing, and that those who qualify may submit applications for enrolment up to the final deadline. Among the relief measures requested, a temporary halt to SIR operations across every state formed the concluding demand.
