SIR Row Deepens as Opposition Demands Removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar

A fresh political and institutional controversy has erupted around the Election Commission of India (ECI) after a report revealed that two of the three Election Commissioners had repeatedly recorded objections to decisions concerning electoral-roll management and the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR). Opposition parties have seized on the disclosures to intensify demands for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, while seeking an independent probe into the functioning of the poll panel.

Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally objected at least 14 times in 10 months, including four times on a single day. Their concerns reportedly covered voter additions and deletions, restoration of names, changes to Form 6, electoral-roll appeals and management of voter databases. The report also said the Commissioners questioned decisions allegedly issued without their knowledge.

One major issue involved changes to Form 6, used for new voter registration. Joshi reportedly questioned the legality of adding a declaration linking applicants to earlier SIR rolls, while Sandhu described the change as “unauthorised” and “illegal”. The two Commissioners also reportedly raised concerns about the centralisation of electoral database controls and related technology.

The ECI, however, rejected suggestions of an institutional breakdown, maintaining that differences during internal deliberations are normal and that final decisions, including those concerning SIR, were unanimously approved by all three Commissioners.

The controversy comes amid the expansion of SIR, which began in Bihar in June 2025 and has since spread nationwide. ECI data cited in reports showed 13.37 crore names absent from draft rolls across 30 States and Union Territories, although the Commission has stressed that draft exclusions do not automatically constitute permanent deletion.

Bihar provided the first major legal test. Around 65 lakh names were absent from the August 2025 draft roll. The Supreme Court subsequently directed greater transparency over exclusions and allowed Aadhaar as an additional identity document, while clarifying that it does not establish citizenship. In May 2026, the Court upheld the ECI's authority to conduct the Bihar SIR while emphasising procedural safeguards.

Opposition leaders including Jairam Ramesh, K C Venugopal, John Brittas and Derek O'Brien have renewed demands for Kumar's removal and an independent or court-monitored inquiry. The latest demand follows earlier removal notices, including a 73-MP Rajya Sabha notice in April 2026.

Under Article 324(5), a CEC can be removed only through the constitutional process applicable to a Supreme Court judge, requiring Parliament to establish proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The latest confrontation therefore places the ECI's internal decision-making, electoral-roll revision and institutional credibility under renewed scrutiny.