New Delhi: In a significant intervention amid the growing political controversy over the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, 42 former judges have voiced support for the exercise and cautioned against what they described as unsubstantiated allegations of “vote theft”.
In an open letter, the former judges said they felt compelled to speak out amid what they termed a sustained campaign against the Election Commission, judiciary and other constitutional institutions.
The signatories, including former Supreme Court judges and retired High Court chief justices and judges, maintained that criticism of constitutional bodies is part of democratic discourse, but warned that repeatedly portraying institutions as corrupt or compromised without established evidence could erode public confidence in democracy.
Judges defend SIR
Defending the SIR exercise, the former judges said the Election Commission has constitutional and statutory authority to revise electoral rolls. They pointed to Article 324 of the Constitution and provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, arguing that intensive revisions have also been carried out in the past.
They said electoral rolls need periodic revision to account for demographic changes, migration, deaths, duplicate entries and changes in residence.
According to the former judges, the objective of the exercise is to ensure that electoral rolls contain the names of eligible voters while removing ineligible or duplicate entries.
42 former judges write an open letter and warn against attempts to undermine Election Commission. https://t.co/2nwEuTXIdF
— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) October 8, 2026
‘Take evidence to courts’
The former judges also took exception to allegations of “vote theft”, urging those making such claims to present evidence before the appropriate constitutional and judicial forums.
They said political parties have every right to question decisions of the Election Commission and seek legal remedies, but cautioned against making allegations that could undermine public faith in the electoral process without sufficient proof.
The intervention comes as Opposition parties have intensified their criticism of the Election Commission and the SIR process. Opposition leaders have raised concerns over alleged irregularities in electoral rolls, while the Election Commission and the BJP have rejected the allegations.
Warning over institutional trust
The former judges stressed that public trust is central to the functioning of a democracy and warned that repeated claims that votes are being stolen or that elections cannot be trusted could have serious consequences for democratic institutions.
They also called for greater responsibility in public debate, urging political leaders, the media and citizens to distinguish between verified facts and allegations.
The former judges’ intervention has added a fresh constitutional and legal dimension to the ongoing SIR controversy, which has emerged as a major political flashpoint.
Their central message was clear: electoral grievances should be backed by evidence and pursued through constitutional mechanisms, while democratic institutions must not be weakened by unsubstantiated allegations.
