Archive · 23 Sep 2026
Congress Accuses Gyanesh Kumar of Acting With Government Support
The Election Commission is the body that helps manage elections in India.
It is conducting a process called the Special Intensive Revision to review electoral rolls.
Congress accused Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar of acting with the support of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah.
It also said Kumar should no longer remain in office.
A report said two other election commissioners had objected to some decisions many times.
The Election Commission said disagreements are normal when officials discuss draft decisions.
It said its final orders are legally valid and follow established procedures.
The Supreme Court also gave a split decision about how election commissioners should be appointed.
The issue will now be considered by a larger bench.
Congress called Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar “Gyaneshgate” and accused him of acting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah’s support.
Jairam Ramesh said Kumar had lost the administrative and moral right to remain in office and referred to a pending impeachment motion.
A report said Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally objected at least 14 times to decisions related to the Special Intensive Revision.
The Election Commission said differing views are normal and that all its orders follow statutory procedures and carry legal authority.
Congress also cited a split Supreme Court verdict concerning the committee that appoints election commissioners and called for greater institutional independence.
- Who
- Congress, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
- What
- Congress accused Gyanesh Kumar of acting with government backing amid reported disagreements over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
- When
- The allegations and Election Commission response were reported on Wednesday; the article also refers to objections made over the previous 10 months.
- Where
- The dispute concerns India's Election Commission and its national electoral-roll revision exercise.
- Why
- Congress reacted to reported objections by two election commissioners and alleged that the Election Commission was not sufficiently independent from the government.
Congress’s Allegations
Election Commission’s Response
Independence of the Election Commission
Congress’s Allegations
Congress alleged that Gyanesh Kumar acted as a proxy for the Union home minister and that his actions had the support of the prime minister and home minister.
Election Commission’s Response
The Election Commission said all its orders carry full legal authority and follow established statutory procedures.
Internal disagreements over electoral-roll revision
Congress’s Allegations
Congress cited a report that Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected at least 14 times to decisions made without their knowledge.
Election Commission’s Response
The Election Commission said differing views and suggestions during draft stages are normal administrative practice intended to improve the electoral process and protect voter rights.
Appointment of election commissioners
Congress’s Allegations
Congress argued that replacing the chief justice with a Cabinet minister on the appointment committee increased central government control and threatened institutional independence.
Election Commission’s Response
The article reports that the Supreme Court issued a split verdict on the committee’s validity, with the issue to be examined by a larger bench.
- Main allegation
- Congress alleged that Gyanesh Kumar’s actions had the full support of Narendra Modi and Amit Shah.
- Special Intensive Revision
- The national exercise to revise electoral rolls is being supervised by all three election commissioners.
- Reported objections
- Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly objected on record at least 14 times over 10 months.
- Congress position
- Jairam Ramesh said Gyanesh Kumar had lost the administrative and moral right to continue in office.
- Election Commission response
- The Election Commission said differing views are normal and that its orders follow statutory procedures and carry legal authority.
- Supreme Court development
- The Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the validity of the committee that appoints election commissioners.
- Earlier appointment framework
- In March 2023, the Supreme Court directed appointments based on recommendations from the prime minister, opposition leader, and chief justice.