Rahul Gandhi, Opposition leaders' plea on voter deletions not listed in SC over defects

#

A petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and 10 prominent Opposition leaders challenging alleged large-scale voter deletions and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was not listed for hearing in the Supreme Court on Tuesday as procedural defects flagged by the registry remained unresolved.

According to information available on the Supreme Court's website, the registry identified 14 defects in the petition, including the absence of a clear copy of the identity card of Congress president and Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge, who is among the co-petitioners.

The registry also pointed out several illegible or missing pages in the petition, preventing the matter from being listed for judicial consideration.

The development came a day after Gandhi and other Opposition leaders participated in a massive march on October 12, raising concerns over the Election Commission's functioning, alleged arbitrary arrests of students, closure of Delhi Metro stations and cancellation of train services.

𝗖𝗝𝗜 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Tuesday assured that the matters would be listed once the procedural defects were rectified.

"We will list all these matters. Make sure that the defects are cured," the CJI told senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who mentioned a matter on behalf of a journalist.

Earlier, responding to Gandhi's request for a meeting to submit a memorandum concerning Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, the Election Commission and restrictions imposed during the protests, the CJI had assured an early hearing if a petition was filed through the judicial process.

However, the Chief Justice had declined a request from Gandhi and Kharge for a personal meeting to submit the memorandum.

In his communication to the two leaders, the CJI said convening a meeting on matters already before the courts would violate the principle of separation of powers and would be "incompatible with established ethics and judicial propriety".

𝗘𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗢𝗽𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁

Besides Gandhi and Kharge, the petition has been filed jointly with several senior leaders representing major Opposition parties.

The co-petitioners include Trinamool Congress MP Saugata Roy, Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav, Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar) leader Supriya Sule and Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut.

Communist Party of India leader D Raja, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha MP Mahua Majhi, CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby and Indian Union Muslim League leader E T Mohammed Basheer are also parties to the petition.

The plea has named the Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi as respondents.

𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝗜𝗥 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁

The petition alleges widespread irregularities in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, including arbitrary deletions and modifications affecting eligible voters.

It has sought an interim direction suspending the SIR exercise across states until the Supreme Court examines the issues raised in the petition.

"Issue an interim direction suspending the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls across the states, pending consideration and adjudication of the issues raised in the present petition, in the interests of protecting the rights of eligible electors and preserving the integrity of the electoral process," the plea said.

The Opposition leaders have also requested the constitution of an independent committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, assisted by technical experts and other eminent citizens, to conduct a time-bound audit of deletions and modifications made during the revision exercise.

The petition seeks directions ensuring that no eligible voter is removed from electoral rolls without prior notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard, in accordance with the law.

It has further requested safeguards to ensure that eligible persons in Punjab and other election-bound states can apply for inclusion in the electoral rolls until the last date permitted under the applicable legal framework.

𝗘𝗖 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁

The petition has sought directions requiring the Election Commission to place before the Supreme Court complete files, agendas, minutes, official notings and objections recorded by Election Commissioners concerning disputed decisions relating to the SIR.

It has also sought access to relevant ECINET and ERONET logs, along with records concerning the June 24, 2025, decision to commence the nationwide revision exercise.

The petitioners have asked the court to examine whether the disputed decisions complied with Article 324 of the Constitution, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, and relevant Supreme Court judgments.

Article 324 vests the Election Commission with the superintendence, direction and control of electoral roll preparation and the conduct of elections.

The petition argues that any decision found to have been taken without lawful authority should be quashed.

It has also sought directions for appropriate action against officials responsible for violations of constitutional or statutory provisions governing electoral roll preparation and revision, including under Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, wherever warranted.

𝗕𝗼𝗼𝘁𝗵-𝘄𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮

The Opposition leaders have requested the publication of booth-wise details of all electors whose names were deleted during the SIR exercise.

The information sought includes the names of deleted voters, reasons for each deletion and a demographic breakdown based on gender and age.

The petition has also called for an effective mechanism to restore the names of eligible voters who may have been wrongly removed from electoral rolls.

Another prayer concerns online Form 6, which is used to apply for inclusion in electoral rolls.

The petitioners have sought directions ensuring that the online form conforms to the format prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, unless the rules are amended through the legally prescribed procedure.

The petition maintains that transparency in electoral roll revisions and compliance with statutory safeguards are necessary to protect the voting rights of eligible citizens.

With the registry's objections yet to be addressed, the matter remains pending at the filing stage. The Supreme Court has indicated that it can be listed for hearing once the identified defects are rectified.