We are aware of everything, will decide: Supreme Court on Chief Election Commissioner row

Supreme Court bench issues notice on a plea filed by Trinamool Congress MP Dola Sen, challenging the changes to Form 6 - the form used for inclusion of names in the electoral rolls

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that it did not wish to hear the controversy surrounding the Election Commission of India's functioning in a piecemeal manner and indicated that it was aware of the developments, as it heard a batch of petitions challenging the poll body's functioning and its conduct of the special intensive revision of electoral rolls.

The observation came from a three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, during the hearing of proceedings concerning allegations against ECI. The bench on Tuesday issued notice on a plea filed by Trinamool Congress MP Dola Sen, challenging the changes to Form 6, the form used for inclusion of names in the electoral rolls.


Read more: Government response sought on plea against mandatory singing of Vande Mataram

Appearing for Sen, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy alleged that ECI had effectively acknowledged the disputed changes to Form 6 but was now attempting to justify them. "Please see the audacity of the institution in justifying the alleged tampering with Form 6," Guruswamy told the bench. Appearing on behalf of ECI, senior advocate Maninder Singh refuted the submission, terming it "rhetoric" meant for outside.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing in the petition filed by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and INDIA bloc leaders, urged the bench to pass an order to preserve the file notings and internal communication, saying it was crucial to decide if the decisions were unanimous or unilateral.

"We are aware of everything. We will decide," CJI Kant verbally remarked. The bench deferred hearing, granting the petitioners 10 days to file a rejoinder to the counter-affidavit filed by ECI on Monday.

In its short counter-affidavit, ECI told the court that all decisions relating to SIR were taken unanimously by the commission, rejecting allegations that chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar acted unilaterally despite objections from the other two election commissioners.

In its counter-affidavit, filed in response to a plea challenging the legality of certain SIR-related decisions and CEC's functioning, ECI said the three orders concerning the revision exercise - dated June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026 - were unanimous decisions. The affidavit, filed by deputy EC Bhanu Prakash Yeturu, was itself approved unanimously by Kumar and ECs Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, ECI said.