Ten directions are sought from the Supreme Court, ranging from production of Election Commission records and an audit committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to an interim suspension of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) across all States. New Delhi: The full prayers in Rahul Gandhi’s writ petition against the Election Commission of India […]
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge told the Congress Working Committee that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar should be removed immediately and called him a puppet of the Union government, while listing five demands on electoral roll transparency. The Election Commission has said that all decisions on the Special Intensive Revision were unanimous.
A Supreme Court PIL seeks the interim suspension of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and a declaration that Election Commission decisions cannot be taken unilaterally. The petition relies on 14 alleged objections recorded by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, while seeking production and preservation of the ECI’s institutional records.
The Supreme Court heard petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision of Bihar’s electoral rolls, raising concerns about de novo preparation of voter lists and citizenship checks. Petitioners argued the process is arbitrary, excludes voters, and exceeds the Election Commission’s statutory powers.
The Supreme Court resumed hearing ADR’s challenge to Bihar’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, raising concerns over transparency, Aadhaar use, and voter deletions. Senior advocates warned that shifting the burden of proving citizenship to voters threatens the constitutional right to vote.
The Supreme Court examined whether the Election Commission can deviate from prescribed rules while conducting a Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls under Article 324 and Section 21. Senior Advocate Rakesh argued that the ECI’s powers are wide but must remain fair, just, and constitutionally regulated.
