The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday described the Supreme Court’s decision to seek responses from the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Centre as evidence that constitutional institutions are functioning independently. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said the court’s decision to hear petitions challenging the functioning of the poll panel demonstrated that the judicial process was operating normally. His remarks came after the Supreme Court issued notices over allegations concerning decisions taken by the Election Commission under Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar without the approval of the other two Election Commissioners.

Patra said the filing of a public interest litigation, its consideration by the Supreme Court and the subsequent issuance of notice to the respondents were part of the established judicial process. He argued that the ability to approach the court and have the matter heard showed that institutions had the freedom to operate within the framework of the Constitution. Patra also rejected descriptions of the country as being under a climate of fear or dictatorship, saying the proceedings demonstrated what he called “democracy in action”.

The Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, sought responses from the Centre, the ECI and other poll panel officials within a week. The proceedings concern a petition alleging that decisions attributed to the ECI were taken without the approval of Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The court also sought responses from Kumar, Sandhu, Joshi, ECI Director General (IT) Seema Khanna and Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg.

Also Read: Sudden Street Demonstration Halts Transit Lines Across Major Gurugram Commercial IT Corridor

The petitioners have alleged that several decisions, guidelines and changes linked to electoral-roll processes were undertaken without the concurrence of the two Election Commissioners. The plea refers to 14 objections allegedly recorded by Sandhu and Joshi between October 2025 and August 2026. It seeks a determination on whether the CEC could exercise powers vested collectively in the Election Commission and challenges the validity of decisions allegedly made without following the required procedure. These remain allegations before the court, and the respondents have been asked to provide their explanations.

The Supreme Court did not pass an interim order suspending Kumar or restricting the functioning of the ECI while seeking the responses. The bench indicated that it wanted authenticated information from the poll panel before considering such requests. The court noted that decisions of the Election Commission are expected to be taken unanimously or, where there is disagreement, according to the majority view. It said that if records ultimately showed that decisions had not followed the applicable process, the matter could be examined further.

Reacting to the proceedings, Patra said institutions had the liberty to debate, question and resolve differences within the constitutional framework. He also referred to the reported differences among the Election Commissioners as a sign of democratic functioning. The Supreme Court’s proceedings, however, are at an initial stage, with the ECI, the Centre and other officials yet to submit their responses. The court’s next consideration of the matter will therefore depend on the explanations and records placed before it.

Also Read: Gambhir Reveals Shreyas Iyer’s Selfless Leadership Quality That Stands Out