File hundreds of cases against EC’s DG (IT), suggests Kapil Sibal

• Kapil Sibal suggests mass protests and legal action against ECI officials as possible ways for the Opposition to pressure the Election Commission over the SIR

• Sibal also argues that CEC Gyanesh Kumar could face mounting pressure to resign, while the Opposition lacks the parliamentary numbers to remove him

• The report raises questions over ECINET and ECI IT chief Seema Khanna’s role, including the system’s impact on electoral-roll revisions and the alleged exclusion of voters

What can the Opposition do to force changes in the Election Commission (EC) and get the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) scrapped? The Government and the ruling party have been obdurate in defending the commission and the CEC Gyanesh Kumar. The election commissioners were granted immunity from prosecution in 2023, a provision which has been challenged and is pending before the Supreme Court while the Opposition lack the numbers in Parliament required to impeach the CEC.

As the INDIA bloc meets in New Delhi on Wednesday to chalk out the Opposition strategy, the question has gained urgency. What can the Opposition possibly do? Political parties may have demanded that the CEC resign voluntarily amid the controversy surrounding the Commission’s conduct of the SIR across the country, which has already deleted or disenfranchised some 130 million voters, a substantial number of whom appear to be adult Indian citizens. It is, however, widely acknowledged that the resignation of the CEC or the other two commissioners is unlikely.

Senior advocate and Rajya Sabha member Kapil Sibal, however, suggests that it is possible that the union government will ask the CEC to step down to ease the pressure. An indication that a powerful section of the ruling establishment has already decided to throw Gyanesh Kumar under the bus is already there. A prominent TV anchor, a contemporary of late Arun Jaitley and a former member of the RSS-affiliated ABVP in Delhi University was scathing in criticising the CEC. Gyanesh Kumar, the anchor said on live TV, had brought disrepute to the Election Commission because of his arrogance and conduct. It is no secret that the CEC considered the Election Commission his fiefdom, he added.

The comment stands out against the fierce defence of the CEC and the commission by BJP leaders and spokespersons. They have maintained that the fact that the three election commissioners sat together on 26 September 2026 — three days after The Indian Express published a report pointing to differences and dissent within the commission — showed that there was no truth in the report. In a ham-handed press note, the Election Commission stressed that the photograph of the three commissioners sitting together had been taken that very day. BJP leaders have maintained that the SIR is necessary, constitutional and has the backing of the full commission.

The ‘unity theory’ flies in the face of the Express report that the two commissioners other than Gyanesh Kumar had objected 14 times in 10 months since October-November, 2025 in writing to the unconstitutional decisions of the commission. This has not been refuted by the commission or the commissioners, because Ritika Chopra of the Express reported that the objections in writing were seen by her and her colleagues. So, the question remains. Why did the prominent TV anchor, who owns the TV channel, who is known to be close to the ruling party and the government, stick his neck out in criticising the CEC?

Kapil Sibal, while talking to Dekoder, an online portal founded by Prannoy Roy, on Tuesday, 29 September said that in his view the Supreme Court should strike down the immunity granted to the Election Commission. While a petition challenging the immunity is pending before the Supreme Court, and notices have been issued in the matter, Sibal felt it was merely a question of time before the CEC is forced out. If the Supreme Court rules against him, he will have no option but to resign, he felt; however, even if the apex court comes to his rescue, public pressure will make it untenable for him to continue, he added.

The Opposition and the civil society, Sibal said, had the option of organising mass protests against the unilateral and arbitrary functioning of the Election Commission. Protests across the country and the national capital would force the commission and the government to act, he added confidently. At the same time, he suggested, hundreds and thousands of cases can also be filed across the country against Seema Khanna, DG (IT) at the Election Commission, which will force the Supreme Court to intervene.

Khanna, Sibal pointed out, was instrumental in rolling out the ECINet, which centralised electronic processes by integrating the BLO app, ERONet for the Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) in the constituencies and 40 other apps used by the ECI. The ECINet, Sibal added, was instrumental in denying the EROs their statutory right to decided on additions and deletions to the electoral roll. It also allowed multiple players at multiple levels, who remain faceless and unknown, to intervene and interfere in the process.

The ECINet was introduced in January 2026, when the SIR was already under way. The EC’s IT division, headed by Khanna, allegedly restricted EROs’ access to the system and assumed a greater role in finalising electoral rolls. It also introduced an AI-based application that flagged what it termed “logical discrepancies” in the data involving 62 lakh voters in West Bengal, with at least 27 lakh subsequently excluded, according to Sibal. Khanna was therefore responsible for depriving legitimate Indian citizens of their right to vote, Sibal suggested, adding that criminal complaints could be filed against her in courts across the country.

Whether the INDIA bloc accepts his suggestions will become clear later on Wednesday. However, the circumstances surrounding Seema Khanna’s deputation to the ECI, Mamata Banerjee’s allegation about her links with the BJP’s IT Cell, her role in awarding the ECINET contract to C-DAC and TCS, and the specifications given to them warrant scrutiny. In any case, the IT Division’s role in the controversy has cast a cloud over the ECI.