Supreme Court on Gyanesh Kumar Case: ECI Decisions Must Follow Consensus or Majority Rule

New Delhi: The Supreme Court held an important hearing on Monday regarding allegations against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar for allegedly taking decisions without the consent of the other two members of the Election Commission. A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant refused to pass an interim order on the demand for immediate suspension of Gyanesh Kumar. However, the court has issued notice to the concerned parties including the Election Commission and the Center and sought their response. The court made it clear that first the records and the reply of the concerned parties will be seen, only then will a further decision be taken on the allegations. 

Did CEC take decisions bypassing other election commissioners?

It has been alleged in the petitions that some important decisions related to SIR i.e. Special Intensive Revision were taken by the Chief Election Commissioner without the consent of other Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The petitioners claimed that decisions should have been taken collectively within the Commission, but in some cases this was not the case. On the basis of these allegations, there has been a demand to suspend the powers of the CEC and cancel the decisions allegedly taken.

Why did the Supreme Court refuse to grant interim relief?

The Supreme Court said that immediate action cannot be taken against the head of a constitutional institution merely on the basis of media reports. The court first wants to see the response and official records of the Election Commission and other concerned parties. The bench also indicated that if records prove that a decision was taken contrary to the prescribed procedure, the court can take action against it. 

Why did it come to the question of taking decisions by majority?

During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant said that in a multi-member body like the Election Commission, decisions are expected to be taken unanimously. If consensus is not reached then the decision can be taken on the basis of majority as per law. The court has asked the Election Commission to clarify the situation regarding following this procedure.  

What will be the decisions if rules are violated?

The bench indicated that if the records of the Election Commission reveal that any decision was taken contrary to the prescribed procedure or law, the court can set it aside. That is, no decision has been immediately declared illegal in Monday's hearing; rather, the court has sought ECI's reply and related records for further investigation. 

What did the Supreme Court clarify regarding Form 6?

During the hearing, the issue of changes made in Form 6 related to voter registration was also raised. CJI Surya Kant clarified that the Supreme Court has not approved any revised Form 6. The court said that after the records come out, it will be seen who made the changes in the form and under what process. This issue has also been raised in the petitions filed regarding the SIR process.  

How many objections are claimed in the petitions?

The petitioners, citing a media investigation report, have claimed that between October 2025 and August 2026, objections were filed at least 14 times by the two other election commissioners in SIR-related matters. However, the Supreme Court has not yet accepted these claims as facts and has therefore sought an official reply and records from the Election Commission.  

What will happen next now?

The Supreme Court has sought answers from the Centre, Election Commission, CEC Gyanesh Kumar and other concerned officials. The court will now look at the records and replies to see whether the decisions in question were in accordance with the law and the prescribed decision procedure of the Commission or not. At present no interim order has been given to suspend Gyanesh Kumar.