Story perspectives

Supreme Court Issues Notice on Gandhi Election Petition

By Drooid · Oct 16, 2026, 4:16 PM UTC · How we work

Summary

Supreme Court Flags Defects

Supreme Court registry flagged 14 procedural defects in Gandhi’s joint petition, including missing authorisation and Rs 220 fee shortfall.
The court issued a notice to the Election Commission and its three commissioners seeking response to the petition.
A three-month-pregnant journalist alleged Gandhi pushed her on October 12, requesting FIR and CCTV preservation.
Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia argued the court should not take suo motu cognizance of the assault, urging formal filing.

Summary

Rahul Gandhi Demands Resignation

Rahul Gandhi launched protests demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar resign.
BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari accused Gandhi of promoting anarchy as political resistance.
Gandhi met AISA president Neha Bora and student leaders at his home for tea.
Gandhi pledged legal action against police brutality in Kerala and Rajasthan after student protests.
CVoter data shows Gandhi’s prime-ministerial approval near 40%, narrowing the gap with Narendra Modi.

History

Historical Context

During the 1975-77 Emergency, the Supreme Court’s 1976 ADM Jabalpur judgment—issued by a five-judge bench led by P.N. Bhagwati and decided 4 to 1—suspended habeas-corpus rights, cementing executive dominance. That precedent of judicial deference resurfaces as the Court now reviews Rahul Gandhi’s petition challenging the Election Commission, highlighting enduring tensions between political power and constitutional safeguards.

1 of 3

Supreme Court Flags Defects

Supreme Court registry flagged 14 procedural defects in Gandhi’s joint petition, including missing authorisation and Rs 220 fee shortfall.
The court issued a notice to the Election Commission and its three commissioners seeking response to the petition.
A three-month-pregnant journalist alleged Gandhi pushed her on October 12, requesting FIR and CCTV preservation.
Senior advocate Gaurav Bhatia argued the court should not take suo motu cognizance of the assault, urging formal filing.

1 / 3