A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the criminal prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar over alleged violations of statutory duties during the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The plea, filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, challenges several decisions allegedly taken without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. It specifically raises objections to changes made to Form 6, the centralisation of electoral-roll data and other decisions connected with the SIR exercise.
Plea seeks prosecution under Representation of People Act
The petitioner has asked the Supreme Court to direct the competent authority to register complaints and initiate prosecution under Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 against Gyanesh Kumar and other officials allegedly responsible for breaches of official duty.
The plea also names Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and ECI Director General (IT) Seema Khanna. It seeks action against any other officials found responsible after an investigation.
Section 32 deals with punishment for certain breaches of official duty connected with the preparation, revision or correction of electoral rolls. The petition argues that the alleged actions during the SIR process warrant examination under this provision.
The filing itself does not establish that any official committed an offence. The allegations remain subject to judicial examination.
Changes to Form 6 under scrutiny
A central issue in the petition is an alleged modification of Form 6, which citizens use to apply for registration as voters.
According to the petition, a new question was added to Form 6 on the ECI’s ECINet portal. The question reportedly asked new applicants whether their own name, or the name of a parent or grandparent, appeared in an electoral roll from the previous SIR exercise.
The petition relies on reported objections by Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi. According to the reports cited in the plea, Joshi questioned whether the statutory form could be changed without a corresponding amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
Sandhu subsequently recorded an objection describing the modification as unauthorised and illegal, according to the petition. The plea argues that the change should therefore be declared invalid and that the original statutory Form 6 should be restored.
Allegations of unilateral decision-making
The petition comes days after The Indian Express reported disagreements within the Election Commission over several decisions concerning electoral rolls.
According to that report, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi recorded objections on at least 14 occasions between November 2025 and August 2026. The reported objections involved voter registration, deletion and restoration of names, Form 6 changes and access to electoral-roll databases.
The petition argues that decisions taken without the required concurrence of the other commissioners should not be allowed to stand.
It relies on Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. The provision states that the Commission should, as far as possible, transact its business unanimously. Where the members differ, the matter is decided according to the majority view.
ECI maintains decisions were unanimous
The Election Commission has disputed the suggestion that its internal disagreements resulted in decisions being taken outside the Commission’s established process.
Following reports about the objections, the ECI said that written notes, observations and differing views are part of deliberations within a multi-member constitutional body. It maintained that the final decisions taken during the period were unanimous.
The Commission has also maintained that the SIR exercise was approved by the full Commission.
The Supreme Court will therefore have to consider the legal claims made in the petition separately from the political and public debate surrounding the electoral-roll revision process.
Plea seeks SIT probe into voter deletions
Apart from seeking prosecution, the petition asks for an independent investigation into the alleged deletion of voters during the SIR exercise.
The petitioner has sought the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or a judicial inquiry commission headed by a retired Supreme Court judge. The proposed investigation would include cybersecurity and information-technology experts.
The plea seeks a forensic examination of the ECI’s ECINet and ERONet databases. It also asks for preservation of server logs, databases, communications and metadata linked to the electoral-roll systems from October 1, 2025 onwards.
According to the petition, around 13 crore names were deleted or processed during the SIR exercise across 30 states and Union territories. The figure is an allegation made in the petition and is not a judicial finding.
Petition also challenges electoral-roll decisions
The plea seeks a declaration that decisions, guidelines, directives and software modifications allegedly introduced without the required concurrence of the other Election Commissioners are unconstitutional and void.
It also asks the court to restore the original Form 6 prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The petitioner has further sought directions concerning alleged appeals filed in West Bengal challenging the restoration of voters.
The petition names the Union government, the Election Commission of India, CEC Gyanesh Kumar and other officials as respondents.
The matter adds another legal challenge to the ongoing debate over the ECI’s functioning and the SIR process. Any decision on prosecution, the validity of the Form 6 changes or the proposed investigation will depend on the Supreme Court’s consideration of the petition and the responses from the concerned authorities.