The Bombay High Court has deferred for three weeks a hearing on a petition challenging Maharashtra’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, after the Election Commission of India (ECI) said the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear related pleas on October 8.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Advait M Sethna said it could not hold a parallel hearing on whether to issue an interim order to the ECI while the Supreme Court was considering challenges to the SIR process. The next hearing before the High Court will take place after the Supreme Court proceedings.
The petition has been filed by two Mumbai residents, including Sagar Ramesh Gawai, youth president of the Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi. It raises concerns about the collection of documents during the enumeration exercise and the possible exclusion of voters based on their inability to provide documents described as “uncollectible” in the petition.
The plea also seeks clarity on the criteria for rationalising polling stations and on the specifications used for ECINET, the ECI’s digital platform. The petitioners have asked the court to direct that Maharashtra’s electoral roll should not be disturbed until the matter is decided.
Senior advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, appearing for the ECI, told the bench that the Supreme Court was already dealing with legal challenges to the SIR exercise. He referred to a November 2025 Supreme Court order requesting High Courts not to decide the issues for the time being.
Advocate Prakash Ambedkar, representing the petitioners, argued that the Supreme Court proceedings were limited to the SIR and citizenship questions arising in Bihar and that the Maharashtra petition raised different issues. He sought an interim direction preventing the deletion of voters in Maharashtra, claiming that nearly two crore names could otherwise be removed from the electoral roll.
The High Court acknowledged that Maharashtra was not listed in the Supreme Court proceedings referred to during the hearing. However, Chief Justice Tripathi said that while the petitioners could argue the matter on that limited aspect, the broader issue was already before the Supreme Court. The bench also questioned how it could pass an interim direction when the Supreme Court had asked High Courts not to proceed on the subject.
The hearing is therefore expected to resume after the Supreme Court’s October 8 proceedings. The High Court’s order means that the petitioners’ request for immediate protection of Maharashtra’s electoral roll has not been decided at this stage.
