Supreme Court Seeks ECI’s Response to Rahul Gandhi-Led Plea for Independent Probe into Poll Irregularities

NEW DELHI: Questions over the decision-making process within the Election Commission of India (ECI) have reached the Supreme Court, which on Thursday sought responses from the poll panel and its three commissioners on a petition led by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and 12 other INDIA bloc leaders.

The petitioners want an independent, time-bound investigation into alleged irregularities in the functioning of the constitutional body.

They have also asked the court to halt the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls until the proposed inquiry is completed.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to the Election Commission and the commissioners.

The bench separately took note of statements attributed to Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Mahua Maji, who is among the petitioners, and directed her to explain her remarks and conduct. The court described the notice concerning her as provisional.

The opposition leaders contend that decisions allegedly taken by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar without collective deliberation raise concerns about the constitutional requirements governing a three-member election commission.

They have asked the court to examine whether the panel followed the procedures and safeguards prescribed by law.

Opposition Seeks Examination of Commission’s Internal Records

A key part of the plea concerns reports alleging that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had objected repeatedly to decisions attributed to Kumar.

Citing a report by the media, the petitioners referred to 14 instances over a period of 10 months in which the two commissioners allegedly raised objections to his decision-making.

They have asked the Supreme Court to obtain the relevant official records, including meeting agendas, minutes, internal notes, files and written objections.

The requested material includes documents concerning the decision taken in June 2025 to conduct the SIR exercise.

The petitioners argue that access to these records is necessary to establish how important decisions were reached and whether the commission’s statutory responsibilities were discharged collectively.

Plea Distinguishes Between SIR Policy and Its Implementation

The opposition leaders have clarified that they are not seeking to overturn the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling upholding the validity of the SIR exercise in Bihar.

Instead, they want the court to examine the legality of specific decisions made during the process and determine whether constitutional and statutory safeguards were respected.

The petition also questions the alleged alteration of Form 6, used in the electoral registration process, without a corresponding amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

Another concern relates to the centralised operation of the ECINET and ERONET systems used in election administration and electoral-roll management.

The petitioners have raised questions about the transparency of these systems and the safeguards governing their use.

They have further alleged that eligible voters may have been excluded from electoral rolls without sufficient notice, an opportunity to be heard or an effective process for restoring their names.

Independent Committee Proposed to Review ECI Functioning

Beyond seeking an investigation, the petition calls for an independent committee led by a retired Supreme Court judge.

Technical specialists and representatives of civil society would also be included, with the proposed panel examining the Election Commission’s decisions, administrative procedures and policies.

The review would also cover the technical framework associated with electronic voting machines (EVMs), according to the petition.

The opposition leaders maintain that an independent and collectively functioning Election Commission is essential to the conduct of free and fair elections.

They argue that the commission’s institutional autonomy forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure and that any breach of the legal framework governing electoral-roll preparation must be addressed.

The plea seeks appropriate action against those found responsible for violations of constitutional or statutory provisions.

Petition Filed After Opposition Leaders Could Not Meet CJI

The legal challenge followed an unsuccessful attempt by Gandhi and Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, who is the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, to meet the Chief Justice and submit their concerns regarding the SIR process and the Election Commission’s functioning.

The CJI had indicated that the issues could be pursued through the appropriate judicial process.

Gandhi subsequently visited the Supreme Court registry on Monday to submit the petition, accompanied by Kharge and leaders from other INDIA bloc parties.

The filing initially encountered procedural objections from the registry. Fourteen defects were reportedly flagged, including a court-fee shortfall of ₹220, an unclear photocopy of Kharge’s identity card, and missing vakalatnamas, or authorisations for legal representation, for nine petitioners.

The petition was filed through advocate S. Prasanna and names the Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi as respondents.

The Supreme Court’s notice marks the next stage in the legal examination of the opposition’s allegations.

The claims concerning the commissioners’ internal disagreements, electoral-roll procedures and voter exclusions remain matters for scrutiny rather than established judicial findings.