The Supreme Court heard a petition filed by opposition leaders challenging alleged discrepancies and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. While issuing notices to the Election Commission of India (ECI), Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and fellow Election Commissioners seeking their responses, the top court expressed strong displeasure over the public remarks and conduct of Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and MP Sanjay Raut, directing him to first clarify his stance.
The petition—moved by 13 key opposition leaders including Congress leader Rahul Gandhi—demands an independent audit headed by a retired Supreme Court judge into the alleged deletion and manipulation of voter names. Sanjay Raut is listed as co-petitioner number six in the case.
Court Censures Sanjay Raut; Grants Only Provisional Standing The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. During proceedings, the bench clarified:
Sanjay Raut’s standing as a petitioner is accepted only provisionally.
His petition will be considered on its merits only after he tenders a satisfactory explanation regarding his out-of-court conduct and statements.
Rebuking the leader, the Chief Justice remarked: "Nobody can pressure the judiciary. We are not sitting in an ivory tower; we are fully aware of what statements are being made outside and what arguments are being presented inside the courtroom."
The bench's rebuke reportedly stemmed from controversial public comments Raut made against the Chief Justice and the judiciary after an appointment sought by Rahul Gandhi and an opposition delegation was declined.
Sanjay Raut's Response Addressing reporters in Mumbai following the court's observations, MP Sanjay Raut stated:
"The Supreme Court is the apex guardian of the country's Constitution. We never intended to disrespect the court. If the Supreme Court feels that, as a petitioner, an improper remark was made on my part, I have no hesitation in offering an apology to the highest constitutional custodian."
Key Demands in the Opposition's Petition The joint petition by opposition leaders outlines two primary demands:
Independent Judicial Audit: Constitute an expert committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to conduct an audit into the alleged arbitrary deletions and manipulations during the SIR drive.
Defined Timeframe: Ensure that the investigation and verification process is completed within a stipulated deadline.
With the Supreme Court seeking replies from Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the ECI, attention now turns to Sanjay Raut's upcoming formal clarification before the bench in the next hearing.