'Gyanesh Kumar is enemy of India': CJP's Abhijeet Dipke on report over EC internal rift

Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke has launched a sharp attack on Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar amid a report alleging differences within the Election Commission of India (ECI) over electoral-roll procedures and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR). In a post on X, Dipke described Gyanesh Kumar as the “enemy of India” and alleged that the Chief Election Commissioner was “scripting elections”. His remarks came after a report claimed that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections on several occasions over decisions connected with electoral-roll management.

The reported disagreements have emerged against the backdrop of the Election Commission's SIR exercise, under which electoral rolls are being reviewed and updated. The process has attracted considerable political attention, particularly over the potential impact of deletions and additions to voter lists. Dipke questioned the Election Commission's handling of the exercise and referred to reports about large-scale changes in electoral rolls. He also alleged that the Commission's actions were favourable to the ruling BJP. These are political allegations made by Dipke and do not constitute an established finding against the Chief Election Commissioner.

The Election Commission has rejected suggestions that major decisions were taken without the agreement of all three members of the poll panel. According to EC sources cited by Hindustan Times, decisions concerning the SIR and other matters had the approval of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar along with Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.

The differing accounts have brought attention to the internal decision-making process of the constitutional body. While the report cited objections allegedly raised by two commissioners, the Election Commission's position is that its decisions were taken with the approval of all three members. The controversy is significant because electoral-roll revisions directly affect the list of people eligible to vote. Large-scale revisions can involve the removal of duplicate, deceased or otherwise ineligible entries, while eligible voters also need accessible procedures to challenge omissions or correct errors.

With political parties and other groups continuing to scrutinise the SIR process, questions around transparency, voter verification and the functioning of the Election Commission are likely to remain in focus. Dipke's latest comments have added another political layer to the controversy, while the Election Commission has maintained that there was no breakdown in its collective decision-making process.

Disclaimer: This image is taken from Hindustan Times.