Supreme Court to Examine Plea to Preserve Election Commission Records Amid Voter Roll Revision Controversy

NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court assured on Tuesday that it will "examine everything" concerning petitions that have requested the preservation of records related to the Election Commission of India's (EC) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant deferred the case for hearing after 10 days, following a request by senior advocate Vikas Singh, who appeared for lead petitioner Rakesh Kumar Singh and other petitioners, including Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The petitioners sought time to respond to an affidavit filed by the EC.

The legal challenge follows street protests in the national capital demanding the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. Multiple petitions were subsequently filed in the Supreme Court by individuals, activists, and Opposition leaders, including Lok Sabha Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi. Previous reports had highlighted internal discussions within the EC regarding procedural aspects of the SIR exercise, which has excluded approximately 13 crore voters from electoral rolls.

During the proceedings, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing petitioners including Gandhi, made what he described as an "innocuous, non-invasive" request for the court to direct the EC to preserve or submit complete records and decisions concerning the SIR exercise.

In its affidavit, the EC maintained a united front, with CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi stating that decisions regarding the SIR were in accordance with the law. The affidavit asserted that a CEC can be removed only through the prescribed procedure and on grounds similar to those for removing a Supreme Court judge.

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the EC, and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, questioned the necessity of the petitioners' request. Mr. Mehta remarked that the court should not be used as a political forum.

Separately, the court issued a notice on a petition filed by All India Trinamool Congress leader Dola Sen, represented by senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, challenging the functioning of the EC and issues related to Form 6. Ms. Guruswamy contended that an EC press note incorrectly stated that a previous Supreme Court judgment authorized the tampering of Form 6.

The EC's affidavit denied charges that Form 6 was altered, explaining that an additional declaration form introduced alongside the statutory form required voters deleted during the SIR exercise to map previous electoral roll entries of their parents and grandparents. The affidavit also noted that appeals regarding the inclusion of deleted voters, numbering over 16 lakh in West Bengal, had been filed by officials with the state's Chief Electoral Officer.

The Supreme Court granted the EC the liberty to file any necessary supplementary affidavits before the next hearing in mid-November.

"Regulatory clarity and institutional stability are fundamental to the functioning of any democracy and business environment alike. When key public institutions face procedural challenges or legal scrutiny, it creates a temporary atmosphere of uncertainty for markets and stakeholders. A transparent judicial review process helps address these concerns effectively, ensuring that administrative actions remain aligned with statutory frameworks." — Dr. Shishir Gupta, Founder & CEO, StartupLanes