Supreme Court on Maharashtra SIR: Rahul Gandhi Plea Not Listed Together

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Maharashtra SIR Plea Alongside Rahul Gandhi’s Petition, Says Issues Will Be Examined State-Wise

The Supreme Court on Thursday, October 15, declined to list a petition challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Maharashtra alongside a separate plea filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders. The court indicated that it intends to examine SIR-related issues on a state-wise basis rather than address them through a generalised approach. The matter was mentioned before a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant. The petition challenging the Maharashtra SIR exercise alleges large-scale deletions from electoral rolls, claiming that approximately 33 per cent of voters have been deleted and that more than one crore voters have been struck off under the category of “logical discrepancy”. However, the bench declined to list the Maharashtra matter on the same day alongside the petition filed by Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders challenging the SIR process.

Supreme Court Wants to Examine SIR Issues State-Wise

During the proceedings, the Supreme Court orally indicated that it wishes to address challenges to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls on a state-by-state basis. The court’s observation suggests that petitions relating to different states may be considered separately, taking into account the specific circumstances and allegations associated with each state’s electoral revision exercise. The SIR process has become a major political and legal issue, with several opposition parties raising concerns about voter deletions, discrepancies in electoral records and the potential impact on eligible voters.The Maharashtra petition specifically challenges the alleged removal of a substantial number of voters from the electoral rolls. The allegations concerning the deletion of approximately 33 per cent of voters and more than one crore names under the “logical discrepancy” category are claims made in the petition and have not been established as judicial findings. The Supreme Court’s decision not to list the matter alongside Rahul Gandhi’s plea does not, by itself, amount to a ruling on the merits of the Maharashtra challenge.

कहानियां जो आपको पसंद आ सकती हैं

Anti-CEC Row: राहुल गांधी की याचिका, SIR पर सुप्रीम कोर्ट में चुनौती

CJP Protest: BJP Says Democracy Wins Over Mobocracy

Gujarat Rent Bill 2026: रेंट बिल के विरोध में वकीलों की हड़ताल, बाइक रैली से जताया विरोध

Rahul Gandhi and INDIA Bloc Leaders Challenge SIR

Several opposition leaders and political parties have approached the Supreme Court challenging aspects of the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision exercise. Among those who have filed petitions are Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Trinamool Congress leader Saugata Roy, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav and Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav. Other petitioners include Sanjay Raut of the Shiv Sena (UBT), M. A. Baby of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), D. Raja of the Communist Party of India, Mahua Majhi of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, Supriya Sule of the NCP faction led by Sharad Pawar, and E. T. Muhammed Basheer of the Indian Union Muslim League. These petitions raise concerns about the conduct of the electoral revision process and its implications for voters and democratic participation. The legal challenges have placed the Election Commission’s voter-roll revision exercise under increased scrutiny, with opposition parties seeking judicial examination of their concerns.

Asaduddin Owaisi Seeks Review of Bihar SIR Judgment

The developments come a day after All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief and Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi approached the Supreme Court seeking a review of its judgment concerning the Bihar SIR exercise.The judgment upheld the legality of the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar. Owaisi’s review petition seeks reconsideration of that decision. The Bihar case has become an important part of the wider legal debate surrounding the Election Commission’s authority to revise electoral rolls and the safeguards required to protect eligible voters from wrongful exclusion. The Maharashtra challenge represents a separate dispute, involving allegations concerning voter deletions in that state. The Supreme Court’s indication that it intends to examine SIR issues state-wise could shape how the different petitions are taken up in the coming weeks.

What Happens Next?

The Supreme Court’s latest observation highlights its preference for examining SIR-related disputes in the context of individual states rather than treating all challenges as a single, nationwide issue. The Maharashtra petition’s allegations regarding voter deletions remain subject to judicial scrutiny. Meanwhile, petitions filed by Rahul Gandhi and other opposition leaders continue to form part of the broader legal challenge to the electoral revision process. The next steps will depend on how the court schedules the pending matters and what directions it issues during subsequent hearings. For now, the court’s state-wise approach signals that the legal questions surrounding the SIR exercise are likely to be considered separately, with the circumstances and allegations in each state playing an important role in the proceedings.