Gyanesh Kumar Under Legal Challenge as SC Plea Seeks Prosecution Over SIR
New Delhi: A fresh legal challenge has reached the Supreme Court over the Election Commission’s handling of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, with a petition seeking criminal prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and action against two other senior officials.
The petition, filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi through advocate Chand Qureshi, questions a series of decisions concerning electoral rolls, including changes made to Form 6, the voter-registration form, and the management of electoral-roll data.
According to the plea, some of these measures were introduced without the concurrence of the other two members of the three-member Election Commission. The petitioner has asked the Supreme Court to declare such decisions, directions and software changes unconstitutional and void.
Plea filed in SC seeking criminal prosecution of CEC Gyanesh Kumar over SIR decisions.
The plea filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi through advocate Chand Qureshi seeks that decisions, guidelines and software modifications allegedly undertaken by Kumar without the… pic.twitter.com/Q2U2efKk5H
— News Arena India (@NewsArenaIndia) September 25, 2026
Petition names senior ECI officials
Apart from CEC Gyanesh Kumar, the petition names Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and ECI Director General (Information Technology) Seema Khanna.
The petitioner has invoked provisions of the Representation of the People Act while seeking prosecution and other legal action. The plea also asks the court to restore the earlier version of Form 6 and invalidate changes allegedly made to the system used for electoral-roll management.
SIT sought into alleged deletion of voter names
A major demand in the petition is the constitution of an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) or judicial inquiry to examine the deletion of voter names during the SIR exercise.
The petitioner has referred to the figure of approximately 13 crore voters and sought a forensic examination of the databases used by the Election Commission. The plea proposes that investigators examine electronic records, including server logs, databases and other digital information, to establish how changes to electoral records were made.
The petition also raises questions over a large number of appeals filed in West Bengal concerning the inclusion of voters and seeks an examination of how those proceedings were initiated.
Form 6 changes under scrutiny
The controversy particularly centres on modifications to Form 6, which is used by citizens to apply for inclusion of their names in electoral rolls.
The plea alleges that changes were made to the form and its digital implementation without the necessary concurrence of the other Election Commissioners. It therefore seeks restoration of the statutory form prescribed under the relevant electoral rules.
The petitioner’s allegations follow reports of written objections raised by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi during discussions on electoral-roll management and the SIR process.
Reported differences within the poll panel
The legal challenge comes days after The Indian Express reported that Sandhu and Joshi had recorded objections on at least 14 occasions between November 2025 and August 2026 over decisions concerning electoral rolls.
The reported disagreements included issues relating to Form 6, deletion and restoration of voter names, access to electoral databases and the manner in which changes were being implemented through the Commission’s digital systems.
The petition relies on these reported objections to argue that decisions concerning the electoral-roll system could not be taken without the required participation of the full Commission.
Separate contempt request
The controversy has also led to a separate legal initiative.
According to reports, Supreme Court advocate Brajesh Singh has approached Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani seeking consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against CEC Gyanesh Kumar.
Singh has reportedly referred to the Supreme Court’s earlier rulings on the functioning of a multi-member Election Commission and argued that the Chief Election Commissioner cannot be treated as exercising authority independent of the Commission as a whole.
The request is separate from the PIL filed by Tripathi and will follow its own legal process.
Election Commission disputes interpretation
The Election Commission has disputed the suggestion that the reported objections establish a breakdown in its functioning.
EC sources have maintained that differences, objections and suggestions are part of an internal deliberative process and have said that decisions on the SIR and other matters were ultimately taken with the approval of all three Election Commissioners.
The Supreme Court has yet to determine the merits of the allegations contained in the latest petition. The claims regarding voter deletions, unilateral decisions and alleged statutory violations remain matters raised by the petitioner and have not been established by a judicial finding.
