NEW DELHI: In a major escalation of the internal rift within the Election Commission of India (ECI), a petition has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking the criminal prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The writ petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi through advocate Chand Qureshi, alleges severe violations of statutory duties and unauthorized decisions made during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The plea comes in the wake of explosive reports revealing that the two other Election Commissioners—Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi—had recorded formal dissents or objections on at least 14 separate occasions. These objections reportedly pertained to major operational decisions, software modifications, and voter roll management carried out without the concurrence of the full Commission.
The petitioner has invoked Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950—which prescribes punishment for official breach of duty in electoral roll preparation—seeking directions to register criminal complaints against CEC Gyanesh Kumar, Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, Director General (IT) Seema Khanna, and other responsible officials. Demand for SIT Audit: The plea urges the apex court to constitute an independent Special Investigation Team (SIT) or a Judicial Inquiry Commission headed by a retired Supreme Court judge. The proposed body would carry out a forensic audit of the ECINet and ERONet databases to probe the alleged deletion or processing of over 13 crore voter names across 30 States and Union Territories during the SIR exercise.
Invoking Section 18 of the CEC and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023—which stipulates that decisions must be made unanimously or by majority—the petition asks the Court to declare all guidelines, portal changes, and directives issued without multi-commissioner consensus as unconstitutional and void ab initio.
The plea specifically highlights the alteration of Form 6 (used for registering new voters) on official portals. It states that both Election Commissioners had formally recorded that statutory forms cannot be amended without corresponding amendments to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
The petitioner has sought immediate interim directions to preserve all server logs, communications, system metadata, and databases associated with the ECINet and ERONet portals. While political opposition leaders have intensified calls for the CEC’s resignation following the revelation of internal dissents, the Election Commission has previously maintained that internal deliberations are part of the decision-making process and that final decisions issued by the body represent unified Commission rulings. The apex court is expected to take up the matter for preliminary hearing in the coming days.
