New Delhi, September 23, 2026: A fresh political controversy has erupted around the Election Commission of India (ECI) after a report said Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had repeatedly recorded objections to decisions concerning electoral-roll management and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.
According to an Indian Express investigation, the two commissioners formally raised objections at least 14 times over the past 10 months, including concerns about decisions they said had been taken without their knowledge.
What Triggered the Controversy?
The report examined internal records concerning several aspects of electoral-roll administration, including the addition, deletion and restoration of voter names, appeals against roll decisions, changes to Form 6 and the management of electoral-roll data.
One area that drew particular attention was the modification of Form 6, the application used by new voters to register. The revised version reportedly included questions concerning whether the applicant, a parent or a grandparent appeared in an earlier intensive revision of electoral rolls.
The two Election Commissioners reportedly questioned whether such changes could be introduced without amending the relevant electoral rules.
Opposition Trains Its Guns on Gyanesh Kumar
The disclosures triggered strong reactions from several Opposition parties.
Congress leaders demanded action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, while leaders from the Samajwadi Party, AAP, CPI(M), Shiv Sena (UBT) and other parties also called for investigations, Kumar’s removal or greater scrutiny of the Election Commission’s functioning.
Some Opposition leaders argued that the reported objections raise questions about how decisions are being made within the three-member constitutional body.
The demands range from a probe into the Commission’s functioning to calls for stopping or reviewing aspects of the SIR exercise.
What Exactly Did the Two Commissioners Object To?
The reported objections covered several areas:
- Voter registration and addition of new names
- Deletion and restoration of names from electoral rolls
- Changes to Form 6
- Appeals involving electoral-roll decisions
- Management and access to voter databases
- Questions about whether certain decisions had received the required approval of the full Commission
The Indian Express investigation reported that the two commissioners had, in some instances, described particular actions as unauthorised or illegal.
The report also said they expressed concerns about increasing centralisation of access to electoral-roll data and changes involving the IT infrastructure supporting voter databases.
Election Commission Rejects ‘Dissent’ Characterisation
The Election Commission has pushed back against the interpretation that the reports demonstrate a breakdown or formal split within the three-member panel.
The ECI said that commissioners can record individual views, suggestions and observations as part of internal deliberations, but that these should not automatically be characterised as formal dissent or separate decisions of the Commission. It maintains that decisions relating to SIR were taken unanimously.
Sources cited by NDTV similarly said that the commissioners had made observations that were considered by the poll body, rather than issuing formal dissenting decisions.
This distinction is central to the controversy: the reported internal objections are documented, while the ECI disputes the interpretation that they amounted to a disagreement over the Commission’s final decisions.
Why SIR Is Politically Sensitive
The Special Intensive Revision involves verification and revision of electoral rolls. The exercise has already attracted political debate over voter documentation, inclusion and deletion of names and safeguards for eligible voters.
The latest controversy adds another dimension by focusing on the internal decision-making process of the Election Commission itself.
Opposition parties say the reported objections warrant investigation because electoral-roll decisions directly affect the integrity of elections. The ECI, meanwhile, maintains that internal deliberations are part of its normal institutional process and that final decisions were taken collectively.
A Developing Institutional Dispute
The issue is therefore not simply a political disagreement over SIR. It now involves questions about how the Election Commission records and resolves differences among its members, how electoral-roll changes are authorised and how voter data is administered.
As political parties demand action against the CEC and greater scrutiny of the SIR process, the ECI’s assertion that its final decisions were unanimous provides the principal counterpoint to the Opposition’s interpretation of the reported objections.
The controversy is expected to keep electoral-roll revision and the functioning of the Election Commission at the centre of India’s political debate in the days ahead.
