On October 12, Lok Sabha opposition leader Rahul Gandhi, accompanied by senior Congress figure Mallikarjun Kharge, lodged a writ petition in the Supreme Court against the Election Commission of India. The filing, executed by advocate S. Prasanna just before the counter closed, targets what the petition describes as large‑scale deletions from voter rolls and procedural irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral lists. The legal move follows a representation submitted on October 10 on behalf of Gandhi and Kharge, and a written response from the Chief Justice of India on October 11 that referenced similar pending cases.
Chief Justice of India Suryakant underscored the judiciary's accessibility with a written remark that "ಸುಪ್ರೀಂ ಕೋರ್ಟ್ ಬಾಗಿಲು ಎಲ್ಲರಿಗೂ ತೆರೆದಿದೆ" – the Supreme Court door is open to everyone.
The same day the petition was filed, the INDIA bloc organized a "Chalo Delhi" march that began at Connaught Place and proceeded to the Supreme Court building. The demonstration, timed to coincide with the filing, aimed to draw public attention to the alleged "Vote Chori" (vote theft) allegations and to pressure the Election Commission. A Congress delegation of ten to fifteen leaders sought permission to access the filing counter inside the court complex, a request that was granted, allowing them to observe the procedural aspects of the petition.
The confrontations occurred at two distinct times: a morning gathering around 10:30 a.
At the heart of the writ is the Special Intensive Revision, a periodic exercise intended to clean up electoral rolls. Gandhi's petition alleges that the current SIR has resulted in the wrongful removal of eligible voters, a claim that has already ignited protests across Delhi.
The Supreme Court scheduled a hearing for October 13, giving the petition a swift procedural timeline. The filing coincided with a request by Gandhi and Kharge for a direct meeting with Chief Justice Suryakant, which was declined, prompting the writ as an alternative legal avenue. The petition references the Chief Justice's October 11 written response, linking it to the broader judicial discourse on electoral integrity.
Parallel to the courtroom drama, young demonstrators gathered peacefully, described by witnesses as arriving "with love in their hearts, not hatred." According to reports, these youths faced alleged beatings by police and BJP workers, an incident that amplified the narrative of state overreach. The confrontations occurred at two distinct times: a morning gathering around 10:30 a.m. and an evening rally at approximately 4:30 p.m., both ending with police action and restrictions on further assembly.
As the October 13 hearing approaches, the petition places the Election Commission under intensified scrutiny. The Supreme Court, maintaining its neutral stance, will weigh the writ against the commission's mandate to ensure clean voter lists. Meanwhile, the Congress leadership continues to mobilize supporters, framing the legal battle as part of a larger struggle for electoral transparency. The outcome will likely shape the discourse around voter roll revisions and the perceived impartiality of India's electoral machinery.