Around 500 protesters from students, youth, women, farmers, and civil society organisations, under the banner of ‘People Against SIR’ marched through Central Delhi on Friday (October 23, 2026), demanding the rollback of the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar. The march was part of a series of protests held across the country against the exercise.

The Delhi Police said around 20 protesters were detained and later released, even as protesters claimed that around 50 were rounded up. Police registered at least one FIR against protesters for violating prohibitory orders under Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

The protesters, carrying the national flag, banners, and placards, assembled near the Gol Dak Khana roundabout at the intersection of Kali Bari Marg and Bhai Vir Singh Marg, before attempting to march towards the Election Commission of India (ECI) headquarters. Ahead of the 1 p.m. protest call, participants gathered in small groups around Bangla Sahib Gurdwara.

Political activist Yogendra Yadav, Communist Party of India leader Annie Raja, and All India Kisan Sabha vice-president Inderjeet Singh joined the march. Representatives of student organisations, including the All India Students’ Association, All India Students’ Federation, Students’ Federation of India, Krantikari Yuva Sangathan and All India Democratic Students’ Organisation, also participated.

Addressing protesters, Mr. Yadav said the movement would continue despite restrictions on demonstrations, including the denotification of Jantar Mantar as a protest site.

“The protest will continue. If you shut down one Jantar Mantar, hundreds more will emerge. If you try to silence one person, people will not remain quiet. People and organisations may change, but the movement will go on. Until Gyanesh Kumar resigns, we will continue to protest,” he said.

Mr. Singh said the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (SKM) decided to support the movement after the protesters, particularly women, were manhandled during earlier demonstrations in Delhi.

“We are angry about what has happened to our young people, particularly the women protesters, who were pushed to the ground and had their clothes torn. Enough is enough. We will continue to support this movement until the SIR is scrapped, the right to vote is protected, and the right to protest at Jantar Mantar is restored,” he said.

Mr. Singh opposed giving police power via Special Executive Magistrates in proceedings against protesters, arguing that the arrangement concentrated too much authority in the hands of the police.

“Now they are the judge, they are the lawyers, the court itself is theirs, it is only natural that we will be declared the criminal,” he said.

Ms. Raja accused the Centre of using the SIR exercise to undermine constitutional safeguards and said the protests would continue until the CEC stepped down.

“The SIR is a tool being used by the Narendra Modi government to undermine the Constitution. The people of this country will not allow that to happen, which is why we continue to raise our voices. We have come very close to the CEC’s office today. Soon we will also reach there and ask him to get out,” she said.

“From Kashmir to Kanyakumari, and from the Northeast to Gujarat, people are organising their own Jantar Mantars. Even if the authorities restrict one protest site, people will find ways to make their voices heard,” she said.

Among those who joined the demonstration was Subhas Mishra, an information technology professional from Bengaluru, who came with his wife. He said citizens needed to participate in public demonstrations rather than confining political discussions to private spaces.

“I am here to support Prashant Bhushan, Abhijeet Dipke and everyone who believes in democracy. Discussions cannot remain confined to drawing rooms and WhatsApp groups. People must come out of their homes. Nothing will change if we only talk among ourselves,” he said.

“The way Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were kept in jail for a week was dictatorial. It is time for people to come out on the streets and exercise their democratic right to protest,” he added.

Barricades halt march

The protesters began marching towards the ECI but were stopped by multiple barricades and security personnel on Ashoka Road, around 500 metres into the march. They briefly sat down on the road as police personnel warned them about the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 163 of BNSS.

The police subsequently pushed the protesters back towards the main road, using whistles and repeated warnings about detention for violating the restrictions. As slogans continued, several protesters were taken away in two detention vehicles near the Gol Dak Khana roundabout.

Separately, the SKM said farmers held demonstrations at district and tehsil headquarters across the country, demanding that the SIR be scrapped and Mr. Kumar be sacked and prosecuted. Farmer delegations submitted memoranda addressed to President Droupadi Murmu through District Magistrates and Sub-Divisional Magistrates.

“In many places, police tried to stop the protests. Leaders were kept under house arrest from early morning, protesters were detained on their way, and prohibitory orders were imposed in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, [and] Haryana, particularly [in] BJP-ruled States,” the organisation said in its statement. SKM also demanded that the Delhi Police must withdraw its order that removed Jantar Mantar as a protest site.

The October 23 mobilisation followed the formation of People Against SIR last week, after an emergency consultation in Delhi attended by representatives of more than 200 organisations. The platform brings together 145 civil society groups, farmers’ unions, workers’ organisations, and women’s and youth groups across 18 States.

Published – October 23, 2026 10:12 pm IST

A view of one of the entry of Jantar Mantar New Delhi on Sunday.
| Photo Credit: SUSHIL KUMAR VERMA

Police personnel deployed after prohibitory orders under Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita enforced in the area around Jantar Mantar Road, following INDIA bloc MPs’ protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, in New Delhi. File.
| Photo Credit: ANI

The Supreme Court on Monday (October 5, 2026) issued notice to the Election Commission (ECI) and the Centre seeking responses in a week on a plea challenging the manner in which the poll panel led by the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar took decisions allegedly without the approval of two Election Commissioners.

Also Read: Protest against CEC Gyanesh Kumar updated on October 5

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana took note of the submissions of senior advocate Vikas Singh and issued the notice.

The Bench said the decisions of the Election Commission have to be either unanimous or by majority, and that it presumed that this is how all decisions were taken.

Also Read: When Election Commission was rocked by internal disputes | Explained

The PIL, filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh, urged the top court to determine whether Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Kumar has been individually exercising powers that legally belong to the ECI as a whole, and, if so, to declare those actions unauthorised and take appropriate legal action.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh for petitioner Rakesh Kumar Singh said the 2023 Act expands the ambit of immunity from legal action in favour of the CEC. “The credibility of the ECI is so undermined that citizens are not feeling safe,” said the senior advocate. He said that only the procedure for the transaction of business within the Election Commission should be unanimous, but decisions can be taken by majority.

Justice J. Joymalya Bagchi said that even judges are not given the protection given to the CEC in Section 16 of the 2023 Act. Under Section 16, the CEC is protected from legal action even after demitting office.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh urged the immediate suspension of the CEC, suggesting that the other two Election Commissioners fill in. Judge Bagchi, in response, said that petitions have to be filed with an eye on the working of the Constitution.

Mr. Singh urged interim relief, or he warned that the “country will burn”. “Till the Supreme Court finally decides, let the Election Commission take decisions unanimously. Put it in an order,” he said. “In the meantime, ensure that the CEC does not take any decision unilaterally.”

CJI Surya Kant said that the allegations were just newspaper reports. Senior Advocate Singh said that the ECI issued a press release and did not deny the news reports.

The Supreme Court, after hearing the petitioners, issued a notice to the Central Government and the Election Commission.

“Direct that respondent No.3 [CEC] shall not exercise the functions of Chief Election Commissioner of India pending final hearing of the present petition; direct that during such period, the business of the Commission be transacted by the unanimous decision of respondent Nos. 4 [Sukhbir Singh Sandhu] and 5 [Vivek Joshi]; and direct that any appointment to the resulting vacancy be made upon the recommendation of a Committee, including the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India,” the plea stated.

The Supreme Court Bench heard a second petition against the CEC filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi. The petition has sought the Constitution of an independent, high-powered Judicial Inquiry Commission or Special Investigation Team headed by a retired apex court judge to probe allegations against CEC Gyanesh Kumar.

The plea seeks an investigation that must encompass, among others, an end-to-end audit of the Election Commission databases and probe the institutional circumstances under which 13 crore names were deleted across 30 States/Union Territories under the Special Intensive Revision. It stated that Gyanesh Kumar, in light of the allegations, would be divested of any statutory or constitutional immunity; the CEC remains directly accountable under the law — subject to police investigation, evidence gathering, and regular trial proceedings as an “ordinary accused”.

Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, for Mr. Tripathi, said the actions of the CEC should at least be called biased. “Deletions of voters have been made in the largest democracy,” she said. “We have grown up with free and fair elections; that is not the case now. I stand by every prayer I have made in the petition.”

The CJI said that the court would tag the petition with the earlier one.

The Indian Express reported on September 25 that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected on record at least 14 times over the last 10 months to decisions and orders on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls that they said were issued without their knowledge or recommendation.

Under fire over the red flags raised by two of its commissioners, the ECI asserted that differing views and observations were a normal part of deliberations in any institution and that all its orders carried full legal sanction and followed established statutory procedures.

Published – October 05, 2026 02:43 pm IST

TVK general secretaries N. Anand and Aadhav Arjuna leading a demonstration against the SIR exercise on Swami Sivananda Salai in Chennai on Sunday.
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement