New Delhi [India], October 7 (ANI): Former Delhi High Court judge Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra on Wednesday criticised the opposition INDIA bloc over its street protests against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process and march to the Election Commission of India (ECI) headquarters.
Speaking to ANI, he countered allegations of "mass voter deletion" during the ECI's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. Justice Dhingra said the agitation was a politically motivated media spectacle rather than a genuine concern over voter rights.
Rebutting opposition claims that the SIR exercise is designed to disenfranchise legitimate voters, Justice Dhingra emphasised that intensive electoral roll revision is a mandatory statutory obligation of the Election Commission:
"This entire noise is not being made by voters. It is being made by those political parties that could not win the election. If the voter has any grievance, the remedy is there. If your name is not there, you can tell the Election Commission, 'I have been wrongly excluded.' There is a remedy available," he said.
The row stems from the ECI's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The opposition INDIA bloc staged protests at New Delhi's Jantar Mantar and marched to the ECI office, demanding rollback of the SIR exercise and resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, alleging large-scale exclusion of voters.
"But condemning SIR itself, saying that SIR should not be there, is only for the purpose of ensuring that the Election Commission should not be allowed to function. SIR is a mandate given to the Election Commission by Parliament that it shall revise the electoral list every 10 years and shall remove the names of dead persons and verify whether the names of new voters have been included... There should be no person who is not a citizen of India having the right to vote. So, these are the mandates given by law to the Election Commission. The Election Commission is following these mandates, and I fail to understand how they can criticise the Election Commission for continuing or conducting SIR," said Justice Dhingra.
Addressing the confrontation between the opposition leaders and the Election Commission regarding meeting appointments, Justice Dhingra argued that the agitation is structured for media visibility rather than structural resolution:
"Last year also, in 2025, as far as I remember, 300 MPs had sent a request that they wanted to meet the Election Commission. The Election Commission said, 'Sorry, we cannot meet 300 persons at once. So, please send a delegation of 30 MPs.' The INDIA bloc refused to send the delegation. So, the purpose is not to meet and raise the grievances. The purpose is to create a scene and create drama. That drama is being created," he added.
Justice Dhingra also accused the 240 MPs of not making a request to the Election Commission seeking an appointment. "This was only communicated by the police to the Election Commission; they said 240 MPs wanted to meet. Then, when the Election Commission said, 'Sorry, we cannot meet 240 MPs; we can only meet a limited delegation'. Then they said, 'No, we'll meet at the Parliament Annexe. The Election Commission should come to the Parliament Annexe.' Why should the Election Commission come to the Parliament Annexe? It has its own office and its own conference room. You can go and meet them there," he said.
Justice Dhingra said the Election Commission allowed the opposition delegation to submit a memorandum to avoid a situation where it gets overwhelmed by sheer numbers and sloganeering at its office.
"You cannot overwhelm the Election Commission just by numbers and shouting. To avoid that situation, the Election Commission permitted them to give the memorandum. But they refused to give the memorandum to the office or to a person deputed by the Election Commission. The purpose was not to meet the Election Commission and raise the grievances. The purpose was to make it a show business, create drama, and come on TV and have maximum coverage by TV media and all this," he added.
The debate intensified after sitting Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan recently remarked in a public address that any administrative action leading to mass disenfranchisement of millions of citizens is "intrinsically arbitrary" and strikes at the heart of the constitutional order.
Addressing the claims of voter deletions cited by Supreme Court Judge Ujjal Bhuyan, Justice Dhingra questioned the factual basis of the assertions and accused the sitting judge of violating judicial ethics, "I don't know how he came to this conclusion that there was mass disenfranchisement in India. Of the 13 crore people whose numbers are being talked about, about 3 crore people are dead. Then about 2.5 crore or 3 crore people have migrated from their place. Many people have their votes registered at two places, here in Delhi and outside also, or in one state and another state. The purification and rectification, intensive checking of the electoral roll, is the duty of the Election Commission."
He said Justice Bhuyan forgot that he is a sitting judge of the Supreme Court, and therefore bound by a higher standard of conduct and pointed to the judicial ethics/restatement of values for Supreme Court judges, which says a sitting judge should not comment on matters that are pending before the court, matters likely to come before the court, or sensitive political/constitutional issues on which the Supreme Court may have to give an opinion.
"That's one thing. Mr. Bhuyan forgot that he was a sitting judge of the Supreme Court. There are rules of ethics to be followed by all sitting judges of the Supreme Court. Those rules state that no sitting judge shall comment upon any pending matter or any matter that is likely to come before the Supreme Court, or any sensitive matter on which the Supreme Court can give an opinion. By making these comments, he has invited upon himself a disqualification," said Justice Dhingra.
"If you take the rules so casually that you forget that you are bound by some rules, and you are talking about the rules applicable to other institutions, this is very surprising... Justice Bhuyan's comments are totally illegal, unlawful, and not worthy of consideration even," he added.
Meanwhile, buses carrying Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, along with other Opposition MPs, are moving towards Jantar Mantar to protest against CEC Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. (ANI)
"Entire noise is not being made by voters, but by parties that couldn't win": Former HC Judge Shiv Narayan Dhingra slams INDIA bloc's EC protests
