पूर्व सुप्रीम कोर्ट न्यायाधीश गोपाल गौड़ा ने SIR फैसले को अवैध, असंवैधानिक और अ‑लोकतांत्रिक कहा, इसे पुनः विचार करने की मांग

Supreme Court's SIR Judgment Illegal, Undemocratic And Must Be Recalled: Former SC Judge Gopala Gowda

Justice Gowda has said the SIR judgment should be recalled as it is "illegal, unconstitutional and undemocratic".

Former Supreme Court judge and ex-CPI(M) member V Gopala Gowda has said the Supreme Court's May 27 judgment upholding the constitutional validity of the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) should be recalled, calling it "illegal, unconstitutional and undemocratic".

Justice Gowda has further said the supreme court should call for all records from the Election Commission to find out whether the decision on SIR was taken by the full Commission with the concurrence and approval of a majority of Election Commissioners.

"May 27 judgement of the Supreme Court upholding the constitutional validity of SIR is illegal, unconstitutional and undemocratic and must be recalled". He also said, "My friends, 78 years of independent India the democracy is butchered and murdered at the hands of the CEC with the support of the people who are at the helm of affairs of government of India. I don't want to disclose their names but people will teach them a lesson. The intellectuals, laureates, the youth, the students all are supporting the mainstream struggle which is being carried out by you (CJP) in the entire nation," Justice Gowda has said.

Justice Gowda is known to have ruled in favour of the farmers in the Singur land acquisition case in 2016, wherein it had ordered the West Bengal government to return nearly 1,000 acres acquired for the Tata Nano plant to the original owners. He was also among the names being considered by the Opposition as its joint candidate for the vice-presidential election in 2017.

The former Supreme Court judge has also defended sitting Supreme Court judge Ujjal Bhuyan's recent remarks, saying there was no judicial impropriety in a sitting apex court judge speaking against mass disenfranchisement of voters.

Notably, former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and two retired Delhi High Court judges have criticised Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan's recent public remarks on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, stressing that the issue is currently pending adjudication before the Supreme Court. Reacting to the remarks, former CJI BR Gavai said that judicial propriety required a judge to maintain restraint when the issue was before the court. "Judicial propriety would not permit him to make any comment on the matter which is sub judice before the court" former CJI Gavai said.

These remarks by Justice Gowda come around the same time when a group of 42 retired judges defended the SIR as a "lawful exercise" and said in an open letter to the "people of India" that they felt compelled to speak because "silence is no longer a neutral choice" and that the opposition's attack on the EC was a "campaign without evidence".

Recently, Former Solicitor General of India and Senior Advocate Harish Salve also strongly objected to political attacks on the Election Commission of India. After members of the Opposition's INDIA Bloc staged a protest march from Parliament House to the Election Commission in New Delhi over the issue of alleged vote theft and their demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, Salve said, "Politics is getting a little beyond what its legitimate boundaries are. I can understand criticising political parties and criticising political opponents, but constitutional institutions should not be made targets of political attacks, and that's exactly what we see happening today."

Salve further expressed that once the ECI clarified that its decision on the SIR were unanimous, the political opponents had no business to stage protests. "Because if there are three people on a panel, and if I am dissenting, if my colleague is dissenting, and the third person is saying, "No, this is a unanimous decision," I will say, "No, sorry, this is wrong. There's no decision." I won't allow this to go through...Anyway, they had a press conference, they reissued a press note, they've had a meeting on this, and they reissued a press note clarifying that all the decisions are unanimous. That should have put an end to all this..", Salve added.

Recently, ECI had rejected a report by The India Express alleging serious differences within the poll panel, saying that internal objections, technical suggestions and checks are a normal part of deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body, and that all its decisions over the past year were taken unanimously. In its press note, the ECI said it functions under Article 324 of the Constitution, statutory rules and established institutional conventions. It said written notes, observations, technical suggestions and internal checks and balances were part of its regular functioning and were intended to ensure transparency, legal compliance and operational rigour.

In a related development, the Supreme Court is seized of a petition filed against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar alleging that he took decisions unilaterally in the name of the Election Commission of India without the approval of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. A CJI Surya Kant led bench had notably refused to issue directions to the Election Commission of India on taking its decision only by majority. Before the court, objections were also raised on the Form 6 being used in the SIR process.

Following the Supreme Court hearing, Election Commission of India clarified that the order for SIR in Bihar issued on 24 June 2025 was issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission. This ECI order was later upheld by the Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 27 May 2026, wherein it said SIR was not in conflict with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the Rules. ECI has further cited its press note dated 26 September 2026, where in Point 1(iii), ECI has stated that, "The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court."

Powered by Nyaya 247 News