Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar Faces Supreme Court Plea Over SIR Row

Supreme Court plea seeks criminal action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged SIR decisions and disputes within the Election Commission.

The Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has moved into a new legal phase, with a petition in the Supreme Court seeking action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

Filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, the plea challenges decisions, guidelines and software changes allegedly made without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners. It also seeks an independent investigation into the deletion of around 13 crore names during the SIR exercise. Business Honor asks will the Supreme Court now examine the Election Commission’s internal dispute?

The development follows an investigation by The Indian Express, which reported that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections at least 14 times over 10 months concerning decisions related to voter registration, deletions, Form 6 and electoral-roll data management.

Amid the SIR row, CJP calls nationwide protests from October 2, 2026, while seeking Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation.

The Election Commission has rejected the suggestion of unilateral decision-making.

The ECI said, “Differing views and observations are a normal part of deliberation in any institution.”

It also maintained that SIR decisions were taken unanimously by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi.

The Commission further stated, “All these decisions are an outcome of the unanimous decisions of the full Commission in the past one year.”

Could those recorded objections become central to the Supreme Court petition?

According to Hindustan Times, the petition has been filed under Article 32 and asks the court to examine decisions and software modifications allegedly undertaken without the concurrence of the other commissioners. The plea also seeks restoration of the original Form 6 used for voter registration.

Another legal move has also emerged, with a lawyer approaching the Attorney General seeking permission to pursue contempt proceedings. The Election Commission maintains that decisions concerning SIR were taken unanimously by Gyanesh Kumar and Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi.

So what does the Election Commission say about the alleged unilateral decisions?

The ECI has rejected the characterization of its internal differences as evidence of unilateral decision-making. It has said that differing views are part of institutional deliberation and maintained that SIR-related decisions were unanimous.

Meanwhile, NDTV reported that the Supreme Court petition seeks criminal prosecution of Gyanesh Kumar and an SIT investigation into the alleged deletion of voter names during SIR.

Business Honor examines that The Supreme Court petition does not itself establish the allegations. Its filing puts the claims before the judiciary, where questions surrounding the Election Commission's decision-making process, electoral-roll revisions and digital systems could now receive legal scrutiny.

 FAQs

What is the Supreme Court SIR petition against Gyanesh Kumar?
The petition seeks legal action, an independent probe and examination of alleged SIR-related decisions involving Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

What is Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls?
SIR is an electoral-roll revision exercise aimed at verifying voter records and updating electoral rolls.

Why is Form 6 important in the SIR controversy?
Form 6 is used for applying for inclusion of a name in the electoral roll. The petition challenges alleged changes to the form and seeks restoration of its original version.

What does the petition allege against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar?
It alleges that certain SIR-related decisions, guidelines and software changes were made without the concurrence of the other Election Commissioners.

What has the Election Commission said about the SIR decisions?
The ECI has rejected claims of unilateral decision-making and said that SIR-related decisions were unanimously taken by the full Commission.