New Delhi: The Supreme Court did not list for hearing a petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and 10 other opposition leaders concerning alleged large-scale voter deletions and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The matter was kept off the docket because filing defects highlighted by the court registry are yet to be addressed.
A bench headed by the Chief Justice of India assured the petitioners that the cases would be listed once the procedural flaws are removed. The registry had flagged 14 defects in the petition, which included missing or illegible pages as well as the absence of a clear identity card copy for co-petitioner and Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge. The legal challenge followed a prominent protest march.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant had previously declined a request from Gandhi and Kharge for an audience to submit a memorandum regarding various election commission issues and administrative actions, noting that discussing sub judice matters would violate the principle of separation of powers and judicial propriety. Along with Gandhi and Kharge, the co-petitioners include prominent opposition figures such as Akhilesh Yadav, Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, Supriya Sule, Saugata Roy, Sanjay Raut, D Raja, Mahua Majhi, M A Baby, and E T Mohammed Basheer.
The petition alleges widespread voter deletions and irregularities during the revision process, urging the appointment of an independent committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to conduct a time-bound audit of changes. It also requests interim orders to suspend the ongoing revision exercise across states, protect eligible voters from removal without proper notice and a hearing, and allow eligible individuals in poll-bound regions like Punjab to apply for inclusion until the final statutory date.
Additionally, the plea asks the apex court to direct the Election Commission of India to submit comprehensive files, minutes, access logs, and administrative records linked to the revision exercise. It challenges the legal validity of decisions made by election authorities and seeks accountability for any breaches of constitutional or statutory provisions governing the electoral rolls.
The Supreme Court reiterated that the matter will proceed as soon as the legal representation's technical issues are cleared by the petitioners, keeping the wide-ranging demands for transparency and procedural audits temporarily on hold.