Full Breakdown
Political Clash Over the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On September 27 2026, Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi alleged that the 2024 Lok Sabha and subsequent state elections were “rigged” and demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. He called the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls a “vote-theft” operation. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis dismissed the accusations as baseless, saying no votes were stolen and that the Election Commission’s (EC) SIR decisions were unanimous. The EC later issued a press note confirming that all SIR orders—including the June 24 2025 nationwide rollout—were approved collectively by the three commissioners.
Background & Context
SIR is a statutory exercise under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, allowing the EC to delete ineligible names and add eligible voters. The Supreme Court has upheld the EC’s authority to conduct SIR. An investigative report on September 23 2026 said Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi recorded objections at least 14 times over ten months concerning voter-registration procedures, Form 6 changes, and database access. The EC said such notes are routine and that final decisions were unanimous.
Data & Statistics
- Objections: 14 documented objections by two commissioners over ten months (Indian Express, September 23).
- West Bengal: 15 constituencies showed the sharpest SIR-linked voter drop, yet the Trinamool Congress won all of them.
- SIR Schedule: Order issued June 24 2025 covering all states; schedule for 12 states/UTs slated for October 27 2025; schedule for 19 states/UTs issued May 14 2026.
- Goa anomaly: 97 voters were found eligible after verification, but the final roll published February 21 2026 omitted them despite eight letters to the EC earlier that month.
Official Statements & Responses
- Election Commission clarified that all SIR decisions were taken with “unanimous approval of the Commission,” that a letter to the Cabinet Secretary concerned only an officer’s deputation, and that the Supreme Court has validated the format of Form 6.
- Sudhanshu Trivedi (BJP spokesperson) called Gandhi’s claims “baseless,” noting the EC’s press note and that internal objections do not indicate a split in the poll panel.
- Bhupendra Patel (Gujarat CM) echoed the BJP line, asserting that the EC functions transparently and that allegations of “vote-theft” are false.
Criticism & Opposition
Gandhi linked alleged manipulation to the disappearance of anti-incumbency, arguing that recent swings in Haryana, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat contradict historical trends. He demanded that CEC Kumar “turn approver” and be held accountable.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Objection vs. Unanimity: The Indian Express report cites formal objections, while the EC maintains that all final decisions were unanimous. No public record shows a dissenting vote on any SIR order.
- Evidence of Vote-Theft: No concrete data has been presented to substantiate claims that anti-BJP votes were removed; the EC’s audit mechanisms and the opportunity for parties to file objections are cited as safeguards.
- Goa Rollback Issue: The ECINet system could not reverse deletions, leaving 97 eligible voters unlisted—a technical gap but not necessarily deliberate manipulation.
What’s Next
The EC’s next phase of SIR implementation proceeds under the May 14 2026 schedule for the remaining states. Legal challenges to the 2023 law governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner remain pending before the Supreme Court, with a split verdict delivered on September 23 2026. The outcome may influence future oversight of the EC’s internal deliberations.