Supreme Court Curative Petition Seeks Recall of Split Verdict Over Election Commission Appointment Law

A curative petition filed by Dr Jaya Thakur, one of the original petitioners challenging the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, asks the Supreme Court to set aside its September 23 order that referred the matter to a Constitution bench. The petition argues that Justice Satish Chandra Sharma should have recused himself because his son, Siddharth Sharma, has been standing counsel for the Election Commission of India (ECI) before the Madhya Pradesh High Court since July 10 2024.

Bar & BenchCNBC TV18Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role The HinduHindustan TimesPlea in Supreme Court seeks recall of CEC law verdict citing judge’s son’s EC link Hindustan Times

The 2023 Act changed the three-member selection panel for the CEC and ECs, replacing the Chief Justice of India with a Union Minister and giving the government a dominant role, raising questions about the Commission’s independence. On September 23, a two-judge bench—Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma—issued a split verdict: Justice Datta declined to refer the petitions to a larger bench, while Justice Sharma held that constitutional questions required a five-judge Constitution bench. The bench ordered the matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of India.

Hindustan TimesBar & BenchPlea in Supreme Court seeks recall of CEC law verdict citing judge’s son’s EC link CNBC TV18Hindustan TimesThe Hindu

• May 6, 7, 14, 27, July 30 2026 – Hearings before Justices Datta and Sharma.

Bar & Bench

• July 10 2024 – Siddharth Sharma appointed standing counsel for the ECI in Madhya Pradesh.

Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role

• March 14 2024 – CEC Gyanesh Kumar and EC Sukhbir Singh Sandhu appointed under the 2023 Act.

Telegraph India

• September 23 2026 – Split verdict delivered; matter sent to the CJI.

Hindustan Times

• September 25 2026 – Media first disclosed Siddharth Sharma’s role.

Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role

• September 29 2026 – Dr Jaya Thakur filed the curative petition.

The Hindu

The petition contends that Justice Sharma never disclosed his son’s ECI engagement during the hearings, depriving petitioners of an opportunity to request his recusal. It cites the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997) to argue that justice must be seen to be done.

Hindustan Times

Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, who certified the petition for curative jurisdiction, said the principle of perceived impartiality required disclosure, even though the judgment was decided on its merits.

Bar & Bench

The petition notes that the Attorney General raised an objection under Article 145(3) on May 14 2026, indicating the government’s view that the matter involves a constitutional question.

Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role

It also seeks exemption from filing a review petition, arguing that a review would be listed before the same two-judge bench and serve “no useful purpose.”

The Hindu

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing before a separate bench, questioned the unanimity of decisions taken by the three-member Election Commission under the current scheme, highlighting concerns about procedural integrity.

Telegraph India

The Supreme Court will consider the curative petition. If granted, a fresh hearing before a Constitution bench could reshape judicial review of the 2023 Act. If denied, the matter will proceed under the existing referral to the Chief Justice of India, who will decide on constituting a larger bench.

Hindustan Times