Rahul Gandhi Targets SIR Process, INDIA Bloc Seeks Independent Audit of Voter Rolls
New Delhi: Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and 10 other INDIA bloc leaders have approached the Supreme Court, seeking greater scrutiny of the Election Commission of India’s functioning and alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The joint petition was filed after opposition leaders marched towards the Supreme Court in Delhi on Monday, October 12, demanding transparency in electoral processes and safeguards against the alleged arbitrary deletion of voters.
The petition calls for an independent committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge, with technical experts and other eminent individuals, to examine the integrity of electoral databases and the implementation of SIR.
The opposition leaders have also sought an interim suspension of the revision exercise until the court considers their concerns. They want safeguards to ensure that no eligible voter is removed without prior notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The petition raises concerns over the alleged unilateral exercise of powers within the Election Commission and seeks disclosure of relevant files, meeting minutes, internal notes and objections relating to disputed SIR decisions.
It also seeks access to records and system logs associated with ECINET and ERONET, the platforms used in election administration and electoral roll management. The leaders have urged the court to examine the processes governing the use and deployment of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs).
The plea further questions the online Form 6 voter-registration process, arguing that additional conditions could create difficulties for eligible citizens, particularly first-time voters.
The petition seeks booth-wise publication of deleted voters’ names, the reasons for their removal and a breakdown by age and gender. It also calls for an effective mechanism to restore the names of eligible voters who may have been wrongly excluded.
The leaders have cited constitutional protections and electoral laws to support their demands, stressing that voter-roll revisions must follow established legal procedures.
The Supreme Court registry has flagged procedural defects in the petition. The petitioners’ counsel has indicated that the deficiencies will be rectified. The registry’s objections are procedural and do not constitute a judicial ruling on the merits of the case.
