The Supreme Court is set to hear on Monday two petitions questioning the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, with one plea calling for a special investigation team probe against him and others and both seeking the nationwide special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls to be declared illegal.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana will hear the matter, The Indian Express reported on Monday. The petitions were filed days after the newspaper reported that Election Commissioners 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, and separately wrote to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan flagging concerns over the integrity of voter software.
The Election Commission has 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.
What the petitions argue
One petition, filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh, refers to the reported differences between CEC Kumar and the two Election Commissioners and the objections raised by them. The plea argues that Article 324(1) of the Constitution does not vest the superintendence, direction and control of elections in an individual Chief Election Commissioner, but in the Commission itself. The petitioner says Kumar "held out as entitled to exercise a power, the collective decision-making authority of the Commission under Article 324 and Section 18 of the 2023 Act," to which his role as chairman gives him no individual title. The plea urges the court to declare the SIR, and all actions and decisions taken under it, invalid from the very beginning and without legal authority, arguing it was undertaken without the necessary statutory or constitutional authority.
Second plea seeks judicial inquiry or SIT
The other petition, by Delhi-based lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi, seeks a probe by an independent, high-powered judicial inquiry commission or an SIT headed by a retired judge of the top court. It refers to "unprecedented constitutional fractures and illegalities committed within the ECI under the CEC as exposed by documentary records published on September 23, 2026," and says the alleged acts fall "squarely outside the ambit of official immunity" and constitute "distinct, personal criminal liability."
The hearing comes days after the court had agreed to take up related pleas against the CEC, and amid a widening political storm over the SIR, with opposition parties demanding Kumar's resignation and street protests in several cities.
Sources:
Supreme Court to hear pleas against CEC Gyanesh Kumar over SIR row — The Indian Express
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana will hear the matter, The Indian Express reported on Monday. The petitions were filed days after the newspaper reported that Election Commissioners 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, and separately wrote to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan flagging concerns over the integrity of voter software.
The Election Commission has 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.
What the petitions argue
One petition, filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh, refers to the reported differences between CEC Kumar and the two Election Commissioners and the objections raised by them. The plea argues that Article 324(1) of the Constitution does not vest the superintendence, direction and control of elections in an individual Chief Election Commissioner, but in the Commission itself. The petitioner says Kumar "held out as entitled to exercise a power, the collective decision-making authority of the Commission under Article 324 and Section 18 of the 2023 Act," to which his role as chairman gives him no individual title. The plea urges the court to declare the SIR, and all actions and decisions taken under it, invalid from the very beginning and without legal authority, arguing it was undertaken without the necessary statutory or constitutional authority.
Second plea seeks judicial inquiry or SIT
The other petition, by Delhi-based lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi, seeks a probe by an independent, high-powered judicial inquiry commission or an SIT headed by a retired judge of the top court. It refers to "unprecedented constitutional fractures and illegalities committed within the ECI under the CEC as exposed by documentary records published on September 23, 2026," and says the alleged acts fall "squarely outside the ambit of official immunity" and constitute "distinct, personal criminal liability."
The hearing comes days after the court had agreed to take up related pleas against the CEC, and amid a widening political storm over the SIR, with opposition parties demanding Kumar's resignation and street protests in several cities.
Sources:
Supreme Court to hear pleas against CEC Gyanesh Kumar over SIR row — The Indian Express
