Opposition parties approach Supreme Court, want SIR suspended, all ECI records made public

Opposition parties have submitted a joint plea to the Supreme Court, urging it to direct the Election Commission of India (ECI) to place on record the complete files, agendas, minutes, notings and  objections recorded by the Election Commissioners in respect of each of the disputed decisions relating to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

They have also sought action against all those who committed any “breach of the constitutional or statutory provisions governing the preparation and revision of electoral rolls”.

The petitioners cut across Opposition party lines, from Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi to Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Samajwadi Party chief and ex-Uttar Pradesh chief minister Akhilesh Yadav, Trinamool Congress’s Sougata Roy, Communist Party of India (Marxist) general secretary M.A. Baby and Communist Party of India general secretary D. Raja.

The petitioners include Lok Sabha MP and Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar) leader Supriya Sule, former Bihar deputy chief minister and Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Yadav, Shiv Sena Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha MP Mahua Majhi and Indian Union Muslim League leader E.T. Mohammed Basheer.

The petition has been filed through Supreme Court Advocate on Record S. Prasanna. A large crowd of advocates and petitioners assembled at the court premises to submit the plea, which comes amidst a protest called by the INDIA bloc against the SIR.

Gandhi is Petitioner No. 1 in the case and Kharge Petitioner No. 1. The petition refers to a recent exchange between both Congress leaders and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, which ended with the CJI asking them to approach the court if they had concerns regarding the SIR.

The petition appears to have done exactly that in the space of a few hours, presumably since the CJI told the leaders on Monday that the top court was already hearing pleas related to the SIR.

Both these issues had been raised by Kharge and Gandhi in a letter to CJI Kant seeking an appointment with him on Monday (October 12). The chief justice, however, declined their request, saying they could approach the court with legal matters and not regarding administrative affairs such as how the anti-SIR protests were being handled.

In their petition, the leaders of INDIA Bloc, who on Monday staged a massive demonstration to the Supreme Court premises, refer to recent reports published in the Indian Express which reveal that the ECI was a divided house when it came to several crucial decisions that have immense bearing on the citizens’ right to vote.

These include disagreements between two Election Commissioners and Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, the alleged centralisation of IT tools (such as portals), the inability of ground-level election staff to include voters they had cleared during the appeals process, and the alleged failure of the top electoral watchdog to include the two commissioners in the decision making process.

“Reports concerning eligible electors who could not be restored to the electoral roll because the software allegedly lacked a rollback facility further underscore the need for an independent technical and procedural examination,” says the petition.

News of the disagreements in particular sparked a series of nationwide protests that have converged around Delhi, Bengaluru and Mumbai in the past few days, with people demanding the resignation of CEC Kumar and facing a brutal police crackdown in turn.

What the petition seeks

The petitioners have asked for the access logs and other complete file records related to the ECI’s initial decision to start the SIR across the country.

The decision to conduct the SIR dates back to June 24, 2025, soon after which the process began from Bihar. In the process, which is still ongoing, 13 crore voters have reportedly been struck off the rolls. The petitioners say the ECI must reveal how such a process leading to mass deletions came to be cleared in the first place.

Further, they say that the ECI must publish booth-wise names of all electors deleted during the SIR, the reasons for each deletion, a breakdown of deletions by gender and age, and to provide an “effective and functional mechanism” for restoring the names of electors found eligible for inclusion in the electoral rolls;

They also ask the top court to direct the ECI to ensure that the online Form 6 conforms to the form prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, unless the rules were amended in accordance with the applicable procedure.

“It is alleged that the form was modified without the corresponding amendment of the applicable rules, notwithstanding reported objections raised by the Election Commissioners themselves,” it says.

Accordingly, the petitioners seek an interim direction suspending the SIR until the issues raised in the petition, “in the interests of protecting the rights of eligible electors and preserving the integrity of the electoral process” were resolved by the top court.

Why do the leaders want all documents?

The demand stems from a series of developments that began after the SIR. First, an RTI application dated July 28, 2025 had sought the files and notings through which the ECI decided to undertake the exercise across the country.

On August 27, 2025, the Central Public Information Officer supplied only the published order dated June 24, 2025 and stated that no other information was available.

In the subsequent first appeal, the First Appellate Authority recorded that the election commission had, until then, not taken any decision to initiate a nationwide SIR in 2025.

This statement appears irreconcilable with paragraph 10 of the ECI’s order dated June, 24 2025, which declares that the ECI had decided to begin the SIR throughout the country. It also contraditions the commission’s press note dated September 26, 2026, in which it states that the order had the unanimous approval of the full commission.

What else the petition asks for

“Examine whether the disputed decisions relating to the Special Intensive Revision were taken in compliance with Article 324 of the Constitution of India, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election
Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023

They have asked for the top court to constitute an independent committee headed by a retired judge, assisted by technical experts and other eminent citizens to conduct, within a fixed time period, an independent audit of the deletions and modifications made during the Special Intensive Revision and of access to, and alterations made in, the electoral-roll databases, including ECINET and ERONET.

They have sought interim directions suspending the ongoing SIR across the country, pending consideration and adjudication of the issues raised in their petition.

The petitioners point out that the lack of unanimity evident within the commission, going by the Indian Express report, was a serious concern since the constitution (Article 324) envisages a multi-member ECI to come to unanimous decisions.

“The petitioner submits that the reported exercise of collective powers by a single member, if established, would raise a substantial question concerning compliance with Article 324 of the constitution and Section 18 of the 2023 Act,” it says.

“The centralised and opaque design, implementation and configuration of ECINet, restriction of ERO access and denial of rollback facilities by the director general of Information Technology [at the ECI] lack statutory sanction,” says the petition.

The six key demands in brief

• Place all the files and documents pertaining to the decision on conducting SIR’ since 24.6.2025.

• Examine whether disputed decisions regarding SIR’ were in compliance of Sec 18 of the CEC & ECs Act (majority decisions).

• Constitute an independent committee headed by a Retired SC Judge to conduct an independent audit of SIR.

• Direct the said committee to review the use and deployment of EVMs with reference to global best practices.

• Ensure Form 6 conforms with the Registration of Electors Rules.

• As an interim measure, suspend ongoing SIR’ exercise.

This article has been republished with permission from The Wire. The original article can be read here.