India Opposition Leaders Briefly Detained During Protest Over Election Commissioner

(Photo: Shibu Baby John/FB)

Members of Parliament from the INDIA bloc gathered at Parliament's Makar Dwar and set out on foot for Nirvachan Sadan, the Election Commission of India's (ECI) headquarters. Security personnel stopped the leaders and MPs from proceeding to the commission's building, and MPs from the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), which is not part of the INDIA bloc, also joined the march, which was halted at Parliament Street.

While most opposition MPs were held back, Gandhi, Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and other Congress members entered the grounds of Akashvani Bhawan, about 200 metres from the commission's office, insisting they be allowed to meet the election commissioners. Gandhi climbed over layered steel barricades, waving the national flag, before slipping through police cordons into the All India Radio premises. Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav and Trinamool Congress MPs Abhishek Banerjee and Derek O'Brien were among those detained after police stopped the march.

The sit-in began around noon and lasted past 8 pm, when police removed Gandhi and others into vans and buses as the MPs resisted. They were taken to New Police Lines at Kingsway Camp and later released, after nearly two hours in custody, ending roughly nine hours of protest in central Delhi. Although some outlets described the leaders as "arrested", Indian police and most domestic reports used the term "detained", which typically refers to temporary custody without formal charges.

Accounts of the scale differed. Gandhi said he was standing with 300 Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha MPs, while Delhi Police said no permission had been sought or granted for the rally and that, after repeated non-compliance, around 260 people were detained, including 10 MPs.

Competing claims

Gandhi accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat of having "hijacked" the country through "vote chori" (vote theft), with Kumar's help. The Congress party said Gandhi had been dragged from a peaceful sit-in.

The Election Commission disputed the opposition's account of a refused meeting. It said no political party had sought an appointment until 4 pm, and that police later informed it that the proposed meeting was with a group of 240 MPs at the Parliament House complex. The commission described the venue and manner of the request as unusual under its established protocol. Police said the leaders were detained from Akashvani Bhavan to maintain law and order, having entered the premises without permission.

The governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) dismissed the protest. BJP leaders characterised it as "daily drama" and "street anarchy" and accused Gandhi of attacking constitutional institutions, while national spokesperson Sambit Patra alleged that the opposition was trying to create anarchy and weaken constitutional bodies for Gandhi's political benefit.

Background: the voter-roll revision

The dispute centres on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), a nationwide re-verification of electoral rolls. Opposition parties have long argued the exercise risks disenfranchising eligible voters. Similar marches have happened before: in August 2025, around 300 opposition leaders marched from parliament to the election panel and were detained, at a time when the BJP and the Election Commission rejected the accusations, with the commission saying changes to voter lists are shared with parties and complaints are investigated.

The current wave of protest was triggered by a newspaper investigation. The Indian Express reported on September 23 that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded 14 objections over a 10-month period concerning decisions and procedures within the poll panel. Their objections reportedly concerned changes to Form 6 for new voters, access to electoral-roll databases and the centralisation of election software, including complaints that some orders were issued without their knowledge.

The commission pushed back. It said it was normal procedure for a commissioner to raise questions during discussion, and that all three commissioners have an equal say. Sources also noted that ECI decisions bear the signatures of all three members, and that a majority view prevails when two of the three agree. Notably, Outlook India cautioned that the investigation establishes that the objections were raised, but does not establish proven misconduct by Kumar or the ECI.

The commission has nonetheless made one significant change since the report. It withdrew the additional SIR-related declaration from the online Form 6 in states where the revision is complete, while maintaining that Form 6 itself was never amended and that the declaration had been upheld by the Supreme Court in its Bihar SIR ruling. That legal claim is contested: LiveLaw reported that the specific declaration now in dispute was not examined in the Bihar SIR judgment.

A broadening movement

Tuesday's march capped two weeks of street protests. On September 25, demonstrations took place across several cities, with police using water cannons in Chandigarh and Patna and opposition leaders detained in Assam and Punjab. On October 2, Delhi Police detained more than 700 protesters around Jantar Mantar, including former Delhi chief minister Atishi. At least 12 metro stations were shut and internet disruptions were reported around the protest site that day.

Not all of the pressure comes from established parties. The Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), a youth-led movement, has been prominent; its founder Abhijeet Dipke said it would stay out of any political programme and remain an independent movement.

(Photo: Cockroach Janata Pary/FB)

Three dynamics stand out. First, the Indian Express report changed the nature of the debate. Earlier opposition allegations could be framed by the government as partisan grievances; objections recorded by two sitting commissioners are harder to dismiss, even if the ECI insists they reflect ordinary deliberation and that decisions were ultimately unanimous.

Second, the opposition's stated goal, Kumar's removal, faces steep institutional hurdles. Under India's Constitution, a Chief Election Commissioner can be removed only through a process similar to that for a Supreme Court judge, requiring special majorities in both houses of Parliament, which the opposition does not command. Derek O'Brien has said more than 60 Rajya Sabha MPs had already backed a removal motion months earlier, but without government support such motions are unlikely to succeed. Street mobilisation is therefore as much about shaping public opinion as achieving an immediate outcome.

Third, the risk cuts both ways. For the opposition, sustained confrontation keeps the issue in the headlines, but it also lets the BJP portray it as attacking a constitutional body rather than offering evidence. For the government and the ECI, repeated detentions of elected MPs, metro closures and internet disruptions invite questions about the space for peaceful protest. How courts rule on the Form 6 dispute, and whether the commission releases more information on internal disagreements, may matter more for public trust than any single march.

-Asia Media Centre