The Supreme Court's decision to issue notice to the Election Commission and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations of unilateral decision-making
in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) row triggered sharp political reactions on Monday, with opposition leaders claiming the hearing had raised serious questions about the functioning of the poll body. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh alleged that the controversy surrounding Form 6 had deepened following the court's observations. "Obviously and very clearly the CEC lied. Form 6 was deliberately modified by the CEC himself to delete Gen Z voters of whom the PM is simply terrified," Ramesh said in a post on X. His remarks came after the Chief Justice clarified during the hearing that any modified Form 6 had not been approved by the Supreme Court. The Bench also sought records relating to the modification of the voter registration form and the process through which the changes were introduced. Senior advocate and Congress Rajya Sabha MP Vivek Tankha described the development as significant, noting that the Supreme Court had emphasised that Election Commission decisions must be taken either unanimously or through a majority decision. Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi also targeted the Election Commission after the hearing. "Didn't ECI press release mention it has been upheld by the SC? This makes CEC Gyanesh Kumar's position all the more untenable ... he needs to go!" she said. Congress leader Pawan Khera went further, demanding Kumar's resignation, immediate suspension of the SIR exercise and a return to ballot-paper elections. The National Conference also welcomed the court's decision to issue notice. Senior leader Bashir Ahmad described the move as a positive first step while expressing hope that the final outcome would be fair and impartial. CJP's Saurav Das tweeted: "Important: This is major! Today, the Supreme Court has distanced itself from one of Gyanesh Kumar’s illegalities. Chief Justice Surya Kant has said that the court DID NOT approve any changes in Form 6 (the form for registration of new voters). Remember that the other two Election Commissioners had objected to a change in the Form which they said was leading to “harassment” of new voters, especially the Gen Z who were being stopped from becoming registered voters. The Form could only be changed after a change in law and election rules. The Court that gave legal cover to Gyanu’s SIR process has put its hands up and said that they had nothing to do with Gyanu’s illegal action! Clock is ticking for Gyanu! Gyanu, it’s done bro." The political reactions came against the backdrop of a widening controversy over reports that Election Commissioners Vivek Joshi and Sukhbir Singh Sandhu had objected to several decisions linked to the SIR process. The Election Commission has maintained that its decisions were taken unanimously and that internal discussions and differing views are a normal part of institutional functioning. On Monday, a Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant issued notice to the Election Commission, CEC Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi while hearing petitions challenging decisions allegedly taken without the concurrence of the full Commission. The court, however, stopped short of suspending Kumar and said it would first examine the Election Commission's response and the relevant records before proceeding further. For now, the Supreme Court has not ruled on the legality of the disputed decisions. But by seeking records on how the decisions were taken, examining the Form 6 changes and agreeing to scrutinise the statutory framework governing the Commission, the court has ensured that the functioning of the Election Commission will remain under intense public and political scrutiny in the weeks ahead.
