SIR row: Rahul seeks interim stay from SC

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, along with INDIA bloc leaders, reached the Supreme Court, seeking an interim stay on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and alleged poll irregularities.

The Supreme Court said the petition has 14 “defects”, including a Rs 220 shortfall in court fees. The Supreme Court also cited missing authorisations from nine petitioners and an illegible photocopy of Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge’s identity card.

According to sources, the registry asked the filing lawyer to submit a clear copy of the ID card of Congress president and Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, who is one of the co-petitioners in the case.

The registry listed objections including the failure to attach certain “vakalatnamas” (written legal documents), the requirement to submit a clear copy of Mallikarjun Kharge’s identity card, and other discrepancies, including “small fonts” and the non-submission of “coloured copies” for two particular documents.

The Supreme Court registry also noted issues with dim or illegible text, missing pages, vernacular pages, and discrepancies in the numbering of certain pages.

The petition names the Election Commission of India (ECI), poll body chief Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi as respondents. The petitioners must now address the “defects” for the top court to list the case for hearing.

The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) named 11 Opposition leaders as petitioners: Rahul Gandhi, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Trinamool Congress leader Saugata Roy, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, RJD leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut, CPI(M) leader MA Baby, CPI leader D Raja, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Mahua Majhi, NCP-SCP leader Supriya Sule and IUML leader ET Mohammed Basheer. The case has been titled “Rahul Gandhi vs Election Commission of India.” Since Rahul Gandhi could not reach the Supreme Court before the 4:30 pm deadline, lawyer S Prasanna filed the petition.

The Supreme Court’s registry has been directed to process the petition today. It also ordered the registry to rectify any defects so the matter can be listed for hearing on Tuesday. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant will likely hear Gandhi’s petition on Tuesday.

The petitioners urged the top court to direct the 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 SIR of electoral rolls, together with the relevant ECINET and ERONET access logs.

It also contended that the complete file recording the decision dated 24 June 2025 to commence the SIR to enforce the rights under Article 14, 19, and 21 read with Article 324 of the Constitution should be placed on record.

The plea sought a direction to examine whether the disputed decisions relating to the SIR were taken in compliance with Article 324 of the Constitution, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, and the law declared by this Hon’ble Court in T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995), and, upon finding any decision to have been taken without lawful authority, quash and/or set aside such decision.

“Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the competent authorities to take appropriate action against the persons responsible for any breach of the constitutional or statutory provisions governing the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, including under Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, wherever warranted,” it contended.

The petitioners also sought a direction to the poll panel, pending adjudication of the present petition and the connected matters, to ensure that every decision of the ECI relating to the SIR is taken and duly minuted in accordance with Section 18 of the 2023 Act.

“Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent No. 1 (ECI) to ensure that the online Form 6 conforms to the form prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, unless and until the said Rules are lawfully amended in accordance with the applicable procedure,” it said.

“Constitute an independent committee headed by a retired Judge of this Court and assisted by technical experts and other citizens of eminence, to conduct, within a fixed time, an independent audit of the deletions and modifications made during the SIR and of access to, and alterations made in, the electoral-roll databases, including ECINET and ERONET; and further direct the said committee to undertake a thorough review of the decisions, policies, procedures, protocols, technical designs and architecture relating to the use and deployment of Electronic Voting Machines, with reference to global best practices and in furtherance of the imperatives of free and fair elections,’ it added.

The plea sought a direction to publish, booth-wise, the names of all electors deleted during the SIR, along with the reasons for each deletion and 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.

“Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to ensure that no elector is deleted from the electoral roll without notice and a reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with law, and to ensure that eligible persons in Punjab and other States going to the polls are permitted to seek inclusion in the electoral rolls until the last date permitted by law,” said the plea.

The Opposition leaders sought an interim direction to suspend the ongoing SIR of electoral rolls across the States of the Union, pending consideration and adjudication of the issues raised in the present Petition, the protect the rights of eligible electors and preserve the integrity of the electoral process.

The Opposition leaders said they filed the plea seeking the intervention of the Apex Court in relation to the alleged unilateral and arbitrary exercise of the collective powers of the ECI by the CEC during the ongoing SIR of electoral rolls; the consequent concerns regarding the integrity of the electoral process; and the infringement of the constitutional right of eligible citizens to be registered as voters and to exercise their right to vote.

“The present Petition arises from serious allegations concerning the functioning of the ECI during the implementation of the SIR, including the alleged exercise of the Commission’s collective powers by the CEC without the knowledge, approval or concurrence of the other Election Commissioners; the absence of a recorded decision of the Commission authorising the nationwide SIR; the unlawful modification of the statutory Form 6 without amendment of the applicable Rules; the centralised and opaque functioning of the ECINET and ERONET electoral-roll databases; and the large-scale exclusion of electors without adequate notice, hearing or an effective mechanism for restoration”, said the plea.

The Petition also raises concerns regarding the modification of the online Form 6 available on ECINET in July 2026 by the addition of a declaration concerning the presence of the applicant or their relatives in an earlier SIR electoral roll. The petitioners also sought examination of the manner in which the ECINET and ERONET electoral-roll databases are designed, configured and operated.

“The Petitioner submits that an internal review cannot substitute an independent audit of the electoral-roll databases, the access permissions governing them, the changes made to electoral records, and the safeguards available for reversing erroneous deletions. 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”, said the plea.

“Pass such other or further order(s) as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, to protect the integrity of the electoral process and the right of every eligible citizen to vote,” said the plea.