SC notice to EC sparks fresh Congress-BJP war of words; NSUI continues protest

A fresh war of words erupted on Monday (October 5) after the Supreme Court issued notices to the Election Commission (EC) and the Centre, seeking responses within a week to a plea challenging the manner in which decisions were allegedly taken by the poll panel under Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar without the approval of the two other Election Commissioners.

The Opposition Congress seized on the development to launch a sharp attack on the CEC, while the BJP argued that the court’s intervention itself demonstrated the strength of India’s democratic institutions. Meanwhile, members of the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) continued to protest in Delhi, demanding Kumar’s resignation and arrest.

What apex court said

The Supreme Court issued the notices while hearing a PIL filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh. The petition seeks a determination on whether the CEC had been individually exercising powers that legally belong to the EC as a whole and, if so, asks the court to declare such actions unauthorised. The plea also sought an interim direction restraining Kumar from functioning as CEC pending a final hearing.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana observed that decisions of the EC are expected to be taken either unanimously or by majority, and said it presumed that this was how decisions were being made. The Court also said it had not approved any alteration to Form 6.

Also read: SIR voter deletions: Can INDIA Bloc turn discontent into a movement?

The petition follows a report in The Indian Express that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had, over the past 10 months, recorded objections at least 14 times to decisions and orders related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, alleging that they had been issued without their knowledge or recommendation.

Everyone involved will be held accountable: Rahul

Responding to the court’s move, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi said it is now “established beyond doubt” that CEC Kumar changed Form 6 “illegally and unilaterally”, and asserted that the CEC as well as everyone else involved in this “criminal assault on democracy” will be held accountable.

Rahul shared on X the screenshot of the September 26 EC statement which read: “The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. For non-SIR period, the Forms applicable as per Rules (the Registration of Electors Rules 1960) will be used.”

In his post on X, Rahul said, “This is just one more proof of him [CEC] abusing his position to help the BJP. He and everyone else involved in this criminal assault on our democracy will be held accountable.”

SC has ‘remarkable opportunity’: Congress

Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh said the Supreme Court now had a “remarkable opportunity” to restore public confidence in the EC following what he termed “damning revelations” about its functioning.

Referring to allegations surrounding the SIR exercise, criticism from sitting and retired Supreme Court judges, and what he described as large-scale deletions from electoral rolls without due process, Ramesh argued that faith in the institution had been eroded.

“The Supreme Court has, in the past, trusted the ECI and the CECs to give a fair account of their running of the body. That trust was based on decades of propriety and competent conduct,” he said, adding that Kumar could not claim the same goodwill.

Ramesh further alleged that modifications made to Form 6 were unlawful and claimed the CEC had “lied” and “violated the law” while acting at the behest of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah. He also accused the poll panel of deliberately altering procedures to facilitate voter deletions, particularly among younger voters.

Also read: When State elects the people: Notebandi, votebandi and the inversion of democracy

The EC had earlier defended its functioning, asserting that differing views and observations were a normal part of deliberations in any institution and maintaining that all its orders carried full legal sanction and were issued in accordance with established statutory procedures.

Proof of democracy: BJP

The BJP, however, dismissed the Congress’s criticism and interpreted the Supreme Court’s intervention as evidence that democratic institutions were functioning independently.

Addressing reporters, BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said the issuance of notices by the apex court was part of a normal judicial process and underscored the strength of India's democratic framework. “The country is moving in a very democratic way. Everyone is speaking their heart out. All procedures and systems are being followed,” Patra said.

He argued that the fact that a PIL could be filed, heard and acted upon by the Supreme Court disproved allegations of “dictatorship” and a climate of fear in the country.

Patra also described the differences expressed by the two Election Commissioners over the SIR exercise as a “healthy sign of democracy”. “In a democracy, raising issues through letters, questioning a process, debating and discussing before arriving at a consensus is precisely how institutions should function,” he said.

NSUI members detained

Meanwhile, in the national capital, several NSUI members were allegedly detained during a symbolic protest near their Raisina Road headquarters.

Also read: SIR Form-7 row: Transparency under scanner amid community targeting allegations

Led by NSUI national president Vinod Jakhar, the demonstrators portrayed themselves as “living dead” and marched towards Jantar Mantar, alleging that voters’ rights and the integrity of the electoral process were under threat. Protesters carried placards with slogans against alleged “vote theft” and demanded accountability from the EC.

The NSUI claimed that Jakhar and several activists were detained by Delhi Police during the demonstration. NSUI media in-charge Ravi Hanuman Pandey condemned the detentions, alleging that students raising legitimate questions about the electoral process were being silenced instead of being heard.

(With agency inputs)