Amid the intensifying political and legal debate surrounding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process and the Election Commission of India (ECI), 42 retired judges have come out in defense of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. In an open letter, the former jurists urged political entities and public figures to refrain from levelling unsubstantiated allegations against constitutional institutions, warning that doing so threatens public faith in democratic processes.
The signatories, which include former Supreme Court judges Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Pankaj Mithal, maintained that genuine grievances must be addressed strictly through legal and democratic channels rather than through rhetorical public campaigns.
“Allegations Made in Press Conferences, Not in Court”
The open letter criticized the trend of questioning electoral integrity without presenting evidence under oath.
"Allegations of vote manipulation are made in press conferences, not inside courtrooms. When the Commission asks for an affidavit, none is filed. EVMs are blamed only after a defeat, while victories delivered through the exact same machines go entirely unquestioned," the letter observed.
Targeting opposition criticism, the judges added: "A party that governed this nation for over five decades is now claiming that the very system that brought it to power is rigged."
Citizen Groups Raised Concerns in September
The statement follows a contrasting open letter submitted in September by over 2,000 prominent citizens—including former Navy Chief Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat, former IAS officer Aditi Mehta, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, historian Aditya Mukherjee, and actor Prakash Raj.
Addressed to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, that petition called for a court-monitored investigation into voter list management and the ECINet portal, demanding that the SIR process be paused pending an independent inquiry.
Debate Within the Legal Fraternity
The row has also triggered discussion among senior legal figures:
-
October 4: Sitting Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan noted during an address at NALSAR University that any process disenfranchising lakhs of citizens is fundamentally arbitrary.
-
October 5: Former Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai commented that sitting judges ought to refrain from public remarks on sub-judice matters, calling it contrary to judicial propriety.
Petitions Pending Before the Supreme Court
Petitions challenging both the procedural validity of the SIR exercise and the legislation excluding the Chief Justice of India from the panel selecting Election Commissioners remain before the Supreme Court. While the apex court declined to grant an interim stay on October 5, it issued notice to the Election Commission, clarifying that any administrative decisions found to be arbitrary or unauthorized can be revisited.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
1.png)
1.png)
.png)