The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the three election commissioners on a petition filed by Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and 12 other INDIA bloc leaders seeking an independent, timebound inquiry into alleged electoral irregularities and the functioning of the poll panel.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi, however, issued a provisional notice to Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut, a co-petitioner in the case, asking him to explain his statements against the CJI after he declined to meet Opposition leaders seeking to raise concerns over ECI. The plea alleges that chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar took several decisions unilaterally, raising questions about compliance with Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which provides for decision-making by majority in the event of a disagreement among the commissioners.
The petition was filed after the CJI indicated that the Opposition leaders’ concerns could be raised through appropriate judicial proceedings rather than through a meeting with the court’s head. Raut’s remarks came on October 12, after the CJI declined to meet Gandhi and Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, the Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, who had sought an audience to submit a memorandum on the functioning of ECI and the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Opposition leaders have sought a timebound, independent inquiry into the disputed decisions, including the June 2025 decision to conduct the SIR exercise, and an interim suspension of the ongoing revision pending the inquiry.
Calling the episode a “misfortune for the Constitution and democracy of this country”, he had said that people would remember the CJI’s refusal to meet the Opposition leaders.
“Issuing notice does not mean that we are condemning anything. We are issuing notice.
But regarding one of the petitioners, we will definitely entertain the issue,” said the bench, adding that the notice against Raut was provisional and subject to his explaining his conduct at the next hearing.
