Opposition parties have demanded action against CEC Gyanesh Kumar after a report alleged repeated objections by two Election Commissioners during the Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls, while the Election Commission maintained that its decisions were unanimous and legally valid.
A fresh political controversy has erupted around Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally objected at least 14 times over a 10-month period to decisions and orders concerning the Election Commission’s functioning and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The report by The Indian Express said the two Election Commissioners had raised objections to decisions they said were taken or issued without their knowledge. Their concerns reportedly covered voter registration, additions and deletions from electoral rolls, changes to Form 6 and the centralisation and security of electoral-roll data. The findings have triggered strong reactions from opposition parties, several of which have demanded Kumar’s removal or impeachment and, in some cases, his arrest.
The controversy comes against the backdrop of the nationwide SIR exercise, which began in Bihar in June 2025 and was subsequently expanded to several other states and Union Territories. According to The Indian Express, more than 13 crore names were struck off draft electoral rolls across 30 states and Union Territories during the process, placing the voter-list revision at the centre of an intense political debate.
The newspaper’s investigation reported that Sandhu and Joshi had objected on record at least 14 times during the previous 10 months, including four instances on a single day. The objections reportedly related to the handling of new voter registrations, deletion and restoration of names, appeals against decisions and access to the electoral-roll database. In some instances, the concerns were also escalated beyond the Election Commission, including communications to the Cabinet Secretary.
The Election Commission, however, rejected the suggestion that the report demonstrated a breakdown in decision-making within the poll panel. The Commission said differing views and observations were part of institutional deliberations and maintained that its official orders, decisions and administrative directions had full legal sanction. It also asserted that important policy decisions and electoral-roll revisions were taken collectively and unanimously by the Commission.
The Commission’s response has not ended the political dispute. Opposition parties have used the report to renew their criticism of Kumar and the conduct of the SIR exercise.
Congress leaders were among the most vocal critics. Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi accused the BJP, RSS and Election Commission of being involved in what he described as “vote chori” and alleged that the process amounted to an attack on the Constitution. His allegations are political claims and have been rejected by the Election Commission’s broader assertion that its decisions were taken through established procedures.
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge also raised the issue of a notice submitted by 73 Opposition MPs on April 24 seeking Kumar’s removal. Kharge questioned whether the pending notice would now be taken up by the Rajya Sabha Chairman, noting that the Monsoon Session had not yet been prorogued. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh separately described the controversy as “Gyaneshgate” and alleged that Kumar had acted with the support of senior members of the Union government. These statements represent the Congress’s political allegations and have not been established as findings by an independent inquiry.
Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also questioned the CEC’s role, while other opposition leaders called for further investigation into the reported internal disagreements. The opposition’s demands have included removal, impeachment, arrest and an independent or Supreme Court-monitored investigation into the functioning of the poll panel.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, whose Trinamool Congress has been a prominent critic of the SIR exercise, demanded fresh Assembly elections in the state using the voter list that existed before the revision. She alleged that the BJP and the Election Commission had improperly influenced the electoral process in West Bengal. The allegation is part of the ongoing political dispute over the SIR and has not been established by a judicial finding.
AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal also called for Kumar’s arrest. DMK president M K Stalin said the CEC should leave office and alleged irregularities in the SIR process, particularly in West Bengal. Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray likewise demanded action against Kumar and referred to the reported objections of Sandhu and Joshi as evidence that required scrutiny. Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav also questioned the legitimacy of governments elected through a process that he alleged was not impartial. CPI(M) leaders called for Parliament to begin proceedings concerning Kumar and sought an immediate halt to the SIR exercise.
The BJP, meanwhile, defended the Election Commission and sought to portray the reported differences between the commissioners as a normal feature of institutional deliberation. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said disagreements among commissioners demonstrated that the members were able to express different views rather than simply agreeing with one another. The BJP has therefore rejected the opposition’s interpretation of the report and backed the Election Commission’s position on collective decision-making.
| Also Read: Supreme Court to hear Banerjee’s plea against ECI TMC name freeze |
At the heart of the dispute is the functioning of the Election Commission during the SIR process. The reported objections from two Election Commissioners have raised questions about how decisions concerning voter registration, deletions, restoration of names and electoral-roll technology were handled. At the same time, the Election Commission has maintained that differences expressed during internal deliberations do not mean that final institutional decisions were invalid or taken outside the law.
| Also Read: ECI defends internal objections amid SIR electoral-roll scrutiny |
The controversy is now likely to keep the SIR process and the functioning of the three-member Election Commission under political and public scrutiny. With opposition parties pressing for action against the CEC and the Election Commission defending the legality and unanimity of its decisions, the dispute has developed into a wider debate over electoral-roll revisions, institutional decision-making and safeguards for voters.
