The Bombay High Court at Goa has asked the Election Commission why its software rejects Form 8 address-change applications outright during the Special Intensive Revision, on a plea by the Salgaonkar family whose names were dropped from the draft roll. The ECI says the family never filed enumeration forms and had a remedy under Form 6.
The Lawyers’ Association for Constitution has constituted a five-member commission of former judges chaired by Justice Madan B. Lokur to examine the constitutional validity, methodology and impact of the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, with public hearings planned and a report targeted for December 2026.
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.
The Election Commission of India has told the Supreme Court that it is wrong to claim that deletions made during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls cost the Trinamool Congress 31 West Bengal Assembly seats, arguing that the figures relied upon improperly club adjudicated deletions with removals of absentee, shifted, dead and duplicate voters. […]
The Election Commission of India has, in a press note approved by the full Commission, asserted that its decisions on the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and the Form 6 declaration were taken unanimously and have been upheld by the Supreme Court. Responding amid a controversy over its internal functioning, the Commission announced a committee to review the ECINet system, internal-governance measures, and an extension of the claims-and-objections timelines in Delhi and Maharashtra.
A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the criminal prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and other officials, under the Representation of the People Act, over alleged breaches of duty in the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. It also seeks an SIT to investigate the alleged deletion of 13 crore names, and a declaration that decisions taken without the two Election Commissioners’ concurrence are void. The allegations are untested.
A writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeks to quash 14 actions of the Election Commission of India and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, allegedly taken over the past ten months despite recorded objections by the two other Election Commissioners, raising questions about the collective functioning of the poll body. Mumbai: A writ petition […]
Hearing a plea over the Special Intensive Revision of Delhi’s electoral rolls, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission and suggested practical safeguards, an FAQ-style guide for voters, Booth Level Officer assistance, and orientation for BLOs, on ‘logical discrepancy’ notices said to be issued to lakhs of voters. The petitioner alleged the notices were vague and burdensome and that shifted voters were being made to file the wrong form; the Commission maintained every notice states its reason and that no voter will be deleted without a hearing. Nothing was decided.