The Supreme Court on Thursday, October 15, pulled up the Opposition’s INDIA bloc over its October 12 march to the court premises, even as a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on the bloc’s plea challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The court issued notice on the petition filed by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and nine INDIA bloc leaders, which questions the ECI’s conduct of the SIR exercise. Notices were also directed to the Election Commission itself, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
But the bench also turned its gaze on the petitioners’ conduct. The Chief Justice orally remarked that the court would “also ask one of the petitioners about his conduct” — a reference to the Opposition’s “March for Democracy” from Barakhamba Road to the Supreme Court on October 12. The written order uploaded later named Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut, one of the 13 petitioners, directing him to explain his conduct over his comments against the Chief Justice and judges. In a significant development, the Attorney General granted consent to the Supreme Court Bar Association to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Raut.
In a parallel move, the bench issued notices to the Congress, Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders — including Mallikarjun Kharge, Akhilesh Yadav and TMC MP Mahua Moitra — on a plea filed by four lawyers. That plea seeks a regulatory framework governing protests near judicial complexes, a prohibition on political demonstrations inside court premises, the preservation of CCTV footage, and the consideration of criminal contempt proceedings against those involved.
The controversy stems from the October 12 march, which followed the CJI’s refusal to meet an Opposition delegation on the ground that the SIR issues were sub-judice. Crowds entered the Supreme Court premises after the registry had closed, causing commotion at the filing centre. The court has ordered the preservation of CCTV and digital footage of the episode, and Delhi Police have registered FIRs over the unauthorised march.
The SIR petitioners, as reported, include Gandhi, Kharge, Saugata Roy of the TMC, Akhilesh Yadav of the SP, Tejashwi Yadav of the RJD, Sanjay Raut, M.A. Baby of the CPI(M), D. Raja of the CPI, Mahua Majhi of the JMM, Supriya Sule of NCP(SP) and E.T. Mohammed Basheer of the IUML — with Thol. Thirumavalavan of the VCK and Sajjad Ahmad Kichloo of the National Conference joining later.
The bench also issued notice on separate SIR-related pleas by AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi and Congress leader Digvijaya Singh. The SIR petitions collectively seek the ECI’s June 24, 2025 decision file, scrutiny of the exercise under Article 324 of the Constitution and the 2023 CEC Act, suspension of the SIR across states, and a direction that no voter be deleted without notice and a hearing.
The day’s developments leave the Opposition fighting on two fronts — pressing its legal challenge to the voter-roll revision while fending off judicial ire over the manner of its protest. How the court balances the right to protest with the dignity of the institution will be watched closely when the matter returns.
