EC row reaches Supreme Court: Plea seeks CEC Gyanesh Kumar's criminal prosecution

A petition filed in the Supreme Court has sought criminal prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged violations of statutory duties in connection with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, besides an independent investigation into the deletion and restoration of voters.

The petition, filed under Article 32 by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, also challenges decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly undertaken without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.

The plea comes amid reports of differences within the three-member Election Commission over several decisions relating to the SIR exercise. A report had said Sandhu and Joshi recorded objections on at least 14 occasions over issues including changes to Form 6, voter deletions and access to electoral-roll databases. The Election Commission has, however, said that individual views expressed by commissioners do not amount to decisions of the Commission and maintained that its final decisions were unanimous.

The petitioner has invoked Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, seeking directions for registration of complaints and prosecution against Kumar, Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, Director General (IT) Seema Khanna and other officials who may be found responsible.

Section 32 deals with punishment for specified breaches of official duty in connection with the preparation, revision or correction of electoral rolls.

One of the principal allegations concerns the modification of Form 6, which is used for registration of new voters. The petition claims that the form was altered to require applicants to provide information about whether they or their relatives appeared in the electoral roll prepared during the previous SIR. According to the plea, Joshi had objected to the change, stating that the statutory form could not be altered without a corresponding amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Sandhu subsequently concurred with the objection.

The petition also relies on Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. It contends that where members of the Commission differ, decisions are required to follow the majority view. On this basis, it seeks a declaration that decisions allegedly taken without the required concurrence are unconstitutional and void.

Another significant prayer is for the constitution of an independent judicial inquiry commission or Special Investigation Team headed by a retired Supreme Court judge and assisted by cybersecurity and information-technology experts.

The proposed probe would examine the functioning of the ECINet and ERONet databases and conduct a forensic audit of electoral-roll data. The petitioner alleges that more than 13 crore names were deleted or processed during the SIR exercise across 30 States and Union Territories, and seeks an investigation into the circumstances surrounding these changes.

The plea further raises questions over 16.10 lakh appeals filed in West Bengal challenging the inclusion of voters, allegedly in the name of the Election Commission. It seeks an inquiry into who authorised and filed these appeals.

The petitioner has also sought restoration of the original Form 6 and preservation of server logs, databases, communications and metadata relating to ECINet and ERONet from October 1, 2025, pending investigation.