CJI Surya Kant refuses Opposition’s request for audience amid election roll dispute

Chief Justice Surya Kant on Monday turned down a request from Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to meet him, saying pending Supreme Court matters and his adjudicatory role made such a meeting inappropriate. The leaders had written to the CJI seeking a slot between 4 pm and 5 pm to apprise him of concerns over police action against youth protesters demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, the fast‑track hearing of cases related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, and the composition of the committee that recommends Election Commission appointments. Kharge told reporters in Bengaluru that the delegation would place its concerns before the CJI "with folded hands" and would not demand anything. The refusal came after four days of opposition rallies in Delhi, including protests near the Election Commission, a sit‑in at Rajghat and an attempted march to the poll panel’s office, as well as a meeting with President Droupadi Murmu. Kharge accused the Modi‑led government of imposing an "undeclared Emergency" and criticised heavy police deployment and detentions. Rahul Gandhi announced a march to the Supreme Court, urging youth, opposition parties and civil‑society groups to join and said a memorandum would seek an end to alleged "vote chori", a halt to SIR and the removal of Gyanesh Kumar. The demand for the CJI’s inclusion in the EC appointment committee is tied to a pending challenge of the 2023 Act that now limits the committee to the Prime Minister, the Lok Sabha opposition leader and a Union minister. On 23 September a split verdict by Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma left the question of referring the matter to a Constitution bench unresolved. ## Context The SIR exercise revises voter lists to remove duplicates and dead entries, a process the opposition says is being misused. The 2023 law that removed the CJI from the EC selection panel replaced an earlier Supreme Court‑mandated arrangement, prompting concerns about the commission’s independence.