Supreme Court Curative Pleas Seek Recall of Split Verdict on Election Commissioner Appointment Law

Petitioners have moved a curative petition in the Supreme Court asking that the split verdict delivered on September 23 2026 in the challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, be recalled. The plea claims Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, who favoured referring the matter to a larger Constitution Bench, did not disclose that his son, Siddharth Sharma, is standing counsel for the Election Commission of India (ECI) before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Curative Plea Seeks Recall Of Supreme Court’s Split Verdict On CEC Appointment Law CNBC TV18Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role Curative plea challenges SC's split verdict on poll panel appointment law Another plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict in CEC, ECs appointment case over Justice SC Sharma's son's link with ECI New Indian ExpressThe Hindu

The 2023 Act restructured the selection committee for the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners to include the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a Union Cabinet minister nominated by the Prime Minister, replacing the earlier requirement that the Chief Justice of India sit as a neutral member. Petitioners argue the change gives the executive a veto over appointments and reduces the opposition leader’s role, undermining the Election Commission’s independence.

New Indian Express

On September 23 2026, a two-judge bench—Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma—issued divergent opinions on whether the constitutional challenge should be referred to a larger bench. Justice Datta declined the Centre’s request for a larger-bench reference, while Justice Sharma argued that a substantial constitutional question existed and favoured referral. Both judges ordered that the matter be placed before the CJI for allocation to a Constitution Bench.

The HinduCNBC TV18New Indian ExpressCurative Plea Seeks Recall Of Supreme Court’s Split Verdict On CEC Appointment Law Another plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict in CEC, ECs appointment case over Justice SC Sharma's son's link with ECI Curative plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict on ECI law over Justice SC Sharma’s son’s ECI role

Justice Dipankar Datta described the 2023 law as “prima facie wrong” for ignoring the earlier Constitution Bench judgment and warned that replacing the CJI with a Union minister grants the executive veto power over appointments.

The Hindu

The Attorney General for India raised an objection under Article 145(3) of the Constitution during oral arguments on May 14 2026, indicating procedural contention over bench composition.

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

Petitioners—including Naman Sherstra and Jaya Thakur—assert that the undisclosed engagement of Justice Sharma’s son with the ECI created a direct conflict of interest. They invoke the Supreme Court’s “reasonable likelihood of bias” and “real danger” tests, contending that the appearance of bias alone warrants curative relief. The petitions argue that disclosure would have allowed parties to seek Justice Sharma’s recusal before the September 23 opinions were pronounced.

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

The allegations of bias remain unadjudicated; the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on whether the curative petitions merit recall of the split verdict. No definitive finding on actual bias or motive has been presented, and the Court’s forthcoming decision on the curative pleas is pending.

Another plea seeks recall of Supreme Court split verdict in CEC, ECs appointment case over Justice SC Sharma's son's link with ECI

The Supreme Court is scheduled to resume business on October 5 2026, when the curative petitions are expected to be considered. The outcome will determine whether the September 23 split verdict is recalled and whether the matter will be referred to a Constitution Bench for a final determination on the constitutional validity of the 2023 appointment law.

Curative Plea Seeks Recall Of Supreme Court’s Split Verdict On CEC Appointment Law