Rahul Gandhi Plea: Registry Defects Cleared and Fees Paid, Supreme Court Issues Notice to Election Commission
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
Summarized by AI; it may make mistakes. Check important info
The Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a joint petition filed by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and 10 prominent INDIA bloc leaders challenging the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, shortly after the petitioners paid shorted court fees and cleared all procedural defects flagged by the court registry.
During the hearing, the Chief Justice of India made a sharp oral remark regarding the political demonstrations surrounding the legal push, stating, "We would like to ask one of the petitioners about his conduct", without naming anyone.
The observation came as the top court took note of LoP Rahul Gandhi leading a public protest march directly toward the Supreme Court complex while attempting to submit the petition.
The Court also ordered to preserve all CCTV footages, law agencies footages captured during the protest.
Registry Objections Cleared and Deficit Fees Paid
The formal issuance of notice comes directly on the heels of the opposition's legal team curing 14 compliance defects originally raised by the Supreme Court registry.
The key administrative and financial shortfalls rectified by the petitioners included:
- Payment of the ₹220 court fee deficit.
- Submission of clear, legible identification documents for co-petitioner and Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge.
- Filing of signed, complete vakalatnamas for nine other senior leaders, including Akhilesh Yadav, Tejashwi Yadav, and Supriya Sule.
- Submission of high-resolution digital logs detailing state-level voter list alterations on pen drives.
Once the registry verified the fee payments and documentation compliance, the petition was formally registered and placed before the court for immediate hearing.
Bench Questions High-Decibel Protest March
While agreeing to examine the legal merits of the petition, the bench expressed strong reservations about attempting to bring political pressure onto judicial proceedings. The Chief Justice's remark specifically targeted the public spectacle created around the filing process without naming anyone, signaling that street protests targeting court procedures would not influence judicial decisions.
The apex court issued notice to Rahul Gandhi, Akhilesh Yadav and others on plea against march to SC.
Despite flagging the conduct of the ‘key petitioner’, the court moved forward with hearing the joint writ petition filed under Article 32, which challenges the execution of the Special Intensive Revision across multiple states over alleged arbitrary voter removals without prior statutory notice.
The plea urges the apex court to:
- Issue an immediate interim stay on the ongoing Special Intensive Revision exercise.
- Constitute an independent audit committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to scrutinise recent voter roll modifications.
- Direct the Election Commission to publish booth-wise details specifying the age, gender, and exact legal grounds for every removed voter.
- Mandate strict compliance with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, for all digital Form 6 procedures.
Court Mandates Response from Poll Panel
Upon taking up the rectified petition, the apex court bench sought a comprehensive reply from the Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and fellow Election Commissioners.
The court instructed the ECI to address the primary contentions raised in the plea, including safeguards against unilateral voter removals, procedural alternatives for citizens experiencing digital authentication failures, and mechanisms to restore wrongly deleted names back onto the final rolls.
