English
English
English
42 former judges defend the Election Commission amid escalating ‘vote theft’ allegations. (Img: X)
New Delhi: Forty-two former judges and retired constitutional office-holders have come out in support of the Election Commission of India amid the Opposition’s escalating allegations of electoral irregularities and “vote theft”. The former judges defended the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and warned that repeated allegations without evidence could weaken public trust in democratic institutions.
The open letter, dated October 7, comes at a time when INDIA bloc MPs led by Lok Sabha Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi are protesting against the Election Commission and demanding action over alleged manipulation of voter rolls. The Opposition has accused the poll panel of enabling large-scale irregularities and has also sought the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The former judges and retired constitutional office-holders expressed concern over what they described as a sustained campaign against the Election Commission, judiciary and other constitutional and statutory institutions.
They acknowledged that criticism of constitutional bodies is an essential part of a democracy. However, they cautioned against turning political criticism into personal attacks or attempts to undermine the credibility of institutions.
The intervention comes amid a growing political confrontation between the Opposition and the Election Commission over the electoral roll revision exercise. The former judges argued that allegations against constitutional authorities should be backed by verifiable evidence and pursued through legally established mechanisms.
A major focus of the letter was the Opposition’s allegation of “vote theft”. The signatories questioned why such serious claims were being raised primarily through political platforms and press conferences instead of being presented before courts or the Election Commission along with supporting evidence.
They also referred to demands for sworn declarations and formal complaints, arguing that allegations of electoral manipulation require documentary evidence and a process of verification.
The former judges further raised the issue of Electronic Voting Machines, pointing out that concerns about EVMs have often surfaced after electoral defeats, while the same machines are generally not questioned when the results favour the parties making the allegations.
#BREAKING: 42 former judges have signed an open letter expressing concern over allegations against the Election Commission and other constitutional institutions. They questioned claims of “vote theft” without supporting evidence, defended the legally established SIR exercise, and warned that repeated attacks could erode public trust. They urged political parties to pursue grievances through established democratic processes
#SIRRow #ECI
— Dynamite News (@DynamiteNews_) October 8, 2026
Their broader argument was that political parties have the right to challenge electoral decisions, but such challenges should be based on evidence rather than repeated claims that could damage public confidence in the electoral system.
The Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, of electoral rolls has emerged as the central point of the current political dispute.
The former judges defended the exercise as part of the legal framework governing electoral rolls. They referred to Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which provides the Election Commission with powers relating to the revision of electoral rolls.
According to the letter, electoral roll revision is intended to identify and remove entries relating to deceased voters, duplicate registrations and people who have shifted their place of residence, while ensuring that eligible citizens are included in the electoral database.
The signatories also pointed to judicial scrutiny of the exercise and said safeguards such as notice, an opportunity to be heard, objections and appeals are available within the process.
The SIR exercise has nevertheless become a major political flashpoint, with Opposition parties arguing that the revision could result in genuine voters being excluded from electoral rolls.
Also Read: CEC Law Row: Will Supreme Court Recall Its Key Order? CJI Surya Kant Says This
The letter comes against the backdrop of an intensifying Opposition campaign against the Election Commission.
INDIA bloc MPs, led by Rahul Gandhi, have staged protests in Delhi over alleged irregularities in voter lists and have demanded accountability from Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The Opposition has alleged that voter-roll manipulation could affect electoral outcomes and has called for greater transparency in the revision process. Its campaign has included public demonstrations and political mobilisation around what it describes as threats to electoral integrity.
The Election Commission and its supporters have rejected the broader allegations, maintaining that electoral procedures are governed by law and institutional safeguards.
The latest intervention by former judges adds another layer to an already intense political and constitutional debate.
The former judges said the larger concern goes beyond the immediate dispute between political parties and the Election Commission.
They warned that repeatedly portraying constitutional institutions as compromised, without establishing the allegations through appropriate legal channels, could gradually weaken public faith in the democratic process.
The letter argued that public confidence is essential for elections to function effectively. If voters begin to believe that their votes have no meaning or that electoral institutions cannot be trusted, the consequences could extend beyond individual elections.
The signatories also cautioned that a prolonged erosion of institutional credibility could create space for political instability and social unrest.
The former judges urged political parties to take their concerns to the Election Commission, courts and other established democratic institutions rather than relying solely on public allegations.
Their appeal comes as the Opposition continues to press for accountability over the SIR exercise and seeks action against the Election Commission leadership. The dispute is now shaping into a wider confrontation over electoral transparency, voter-list management and the credibility of constitutional institutions.
For voters, the debate has implications beyond the current political contest. The outcome of the confrontation could influence how electoral-roll revisions are conducted, how complaints about voter registration are addressed and how much public confidence citizens place in the institutions responsible for conducting elections. The latest letter therefore adds a significant institutional voice to one of the most politically charged electoral debates currently unfolding in India.
