'Must explain conduct': CJI raps Rahul Gandhi over SC march
What's the story
The Supreme Court on Thursday pulled up Rahul Gandhi over his march to the top court on October 12 and asked him to explain his actions. "He (Rahul Gandhi) will have to give an explanation," CJI Surya Kant told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Gandhi. Opposition leaders had marched toward the Supreme Court on Monday, demanding the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and the scrapping of the SIR.
Notice
Preserve and submit all CCTV footage of protest-related incidents: SC
Today, the top court took up the petitions filed by Gandhi and other INDIA Bloc leaders questioning the functioning of the ECI over the decisions related to SIR.
The Supreme Court has issued notice seeking responses from ECI, CEC Gyanesh Kumar, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi on Gandhi and others' plea.
It also issued a notice on a different plea seeking a regulatory framework for protests and processions near judicial complexes.
Plea
Preserve and submit all CCTV footage of protest-related incidents: SC
The plea sought criminal contempt proceedings against opposition leaders, including Gandhi, Akhilesh Yadav and Mahua Moitra, among others, over the march.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia called the conduct unacceptable.
Bhatia said 200 lawyers signed a memorandum expressing concern that such conduct amounted to "browbeating," to which CJI responded, "Nobody can browbeat us."
It proceeded to order all law enforcement agencies to preserve and submit all CCTV footage of protest-related incidents after various counsel sought the same.
Relief sought
Petition seeks judicial scrutiny of ECI's decision-making process
The INDIA bloc leaders' petition sought judicial scrutiny of the ECI's decision-making process and directions to ensure compliance with electoral laws.
It demands production of records related to SIR, examination of decisions under constitutional provisions, and quashing of decisions made without lawful authority.
The petitioners also seek a direction for collective decision-making on SIR-related matters and compliance with registration rules unless amended.
Audit demand
Committee headed by retired SC judge sought for audit
The petitioners have also demanded a committee headed by a retired Supreme Court judge to audit SIR deletions and review EVM processes.
They also want booth-wise publication of deleted voters' names with reasons for deletion.
A functional mechanism for restoring names is sought, along with directions that no voter's name be deleted without notice.
The petitioners also seek suspension of the SIR exercise across all states pending adjudication of their petition.