Election Commission, Gyanesh Kumar, SIR: What are petitions seeking in courts

Following The Indian Express's reports on the points raised by two Election Commissioners, a bunch of petitions have been filed in courts, including the Supreme Court. The petitions have questioned the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and sought an SIT investigation, apart from his removal from office. As decisions are awaited, here's a closer look at what has happened in these matters so far.

Supreme Court Live | Supreme Court hears pleas against CEC Gyanesh Kumar's functioning

Days after The Indian Express reported that two Election Commissioners had objected to decisions taken during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, two petitions were filed in the Supreme Court, and two petitions were filed in the Bombay High Court challenging the SIR process in Maharashtra.

Supreme Court

One of the petitions by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh referred to the alleged differences between CEC Kumar and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi and the objections raised by them. "Article 324(1) of the Constitution does not vest the superintendence, direction and control of elections in an individual Chief Election Commissioner. It vests those powers in a Commission," said the plea. The petitioner urged the court to declare SIR, and all actions, decisions, directions, and measures taken under it, invalid from the very beginning and without legal authority. The petitioner argued that the SIR was undertaken without the necessary statutory or constitutional authority and without following the procedure required by law.

The other petition by Delhi-based lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi has sought a probe by an independent, high-powered judicial inquiry commission or an SIT headed by a retired judge of the top court. The petition refers to "unprecedented constitutional fractures and illegalities committed within the ECI under the CEC as exposed by documentary records published on September 23, 2026". The plea said the alleged "act of... CEC Kumar... falls squarely outside the ambit of official immunity and constitutes distinct, personal criminal liability".

The petitions were filed days after The Indian Express reported that ECs Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections at least 14 times over the past 10 months to decisions and orders concerning the SIR of electoral rolls. The two commissioners said some of the decisions were issued without their knowledge or recommendation. The two ECs separately wrote to the country's top bureaucrat, Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan, flagging concerns over the integrity of voter software. The ECI said the letters sent by Sandhu and Joshi to the Cabinet Secretary concerned an officer on deputation and were not related to policy or IT division matters.

Bombay High Court

Following The Indian Express' report, two pleas were filed in the Bombay High Court seeking several directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI), including placing on record 14 decisions concerning the SIR, criteria for polling station rationalisation and ECINET specifications.

They also sought restoration of every voter deleted during the SIR process in Maharashtra, or quashing of the SIR directions for the state and a stay on forthcoming Assembly elections until the electoral rolls are made "legally compliant".

One of the pleas seeks the appointment of an independent judicial committee to "investigate the data deletions and software blockages implemented during the current SIR process".

A writ petition filed by four Maharashtra residents and registered voters through advocate Asim Sarode before the Kolhapur circuit bench cited the Express investigation and claimed they were "aggrieved by the systematic erosion of constitutional norms governing the management of electoral rolls", which they said directly affected their fundamental rights.

The matter is likely to come up on October 22.

At the High Court's Goa bench, a matter was heard relating the deletion of names of six members of a family in Goa from the electoral rolls after their Form 8 applications for address change were rejected. It remarked that the Election Commission of India (ECI) must endeavour to have as many voters who are eligible on the electoral rolls. The court said the poll body has to achieve the objective of not missing out on a voter, even when they come forward "with a wrong form".

"We are asking the principle. The Election Commission must endeavour, and we see that is the endeavour...to have as many voters who are eligible on the rolls. Why should it reject the Form-8 if it comes during that [enumeration] period [of SIR]?"

Independent panel of former SC, HC judges

In a related development, former Supreme Court and High Court judges have formed a panel to examine the SIR exercise. In a press release dated October 2, the Lawyers Association for Constitution (LAFC) said that the constitution of the independent inquiry commission was in "response to growing concerns raised by citizens regarding the design, implementation, and consequences of the SIR of electoral rolls" by the Election Commission of India.

The panel is stated to function with "complete autonomy" to examine the constitutional and statutory validity, methodology, and overall impact of the SIR exercise on eligible voters.

The panel will be chaired by former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B. Lokur and will also comprise Justice A K Patnaik (former Judge, Supreme Court of India); Justice Badar Durrez Ahmad (former Chief Justice, Jammu & Kashmir High Court); Justice Rekha Sharma (former Judge, Delhi High Court) and Justice Anjana Prakash (former Judge, Patna High Court).

"Senior legal practitioners, including Mr Kapil Sibal, Mr Prashant Bhushan, Mr Chander Uday Singh, Mr Prashanto Chandra Sen, Mr Raju Ramachandran, Ms Rebecca Mammen John, Ms Warisha Farasat, Ms Vrinda Grover, etc will provide strategic legal advice," the release said.

The panel seeks to travel across the country to hear testimony directly from affected citizens, civil society groups, and experts. At the same time, a dedicated research wing would collate and analyse the data regarding voter roll additions/deletions across the country and present it before it.

"A legal support team will review relevant legislation, notifications, and verification processes to assess compliance with constitutional safeguards," the release added.