Yogendra

• Political activist Yogendra Yadav explained his decision to skip the Supreme Court hearing regarding the Special Institutional Revision (SIR) of voter lists. • Yadav argues that the court's decision was a foregone conclusion, asserting that the judiciary effectively gave the Election Commission of India (ECI) a "carte blanche" to manage voter lists without sufficient oversight. • The situation is significant as it suggests a lack of judicial intervention to protect voter integrity or annul elections held after the SIR process.

• The Supreme Court of India ruled on Wednesday that the Special Summary Revision (SIR) exercise conducted by the Election Commission supports the constitutional requirement for free and fair elections. • Petitioner Yogendra Yadav criticized the verdict, claiming that such powers could allow the BJP to decide who is eligible to vote. • The ruling is significant as it validates the Election Commission's processes for updating voter rolls, which critics argue can be manipulated to disenfranchise specific groups.

• Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan have raised concerns regarding the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Interim Revision (SIR) exercise. • Yadav alleges that the ECI continued rolling out phases of the exercise during Supreme Court hearings, creating a "fait accompli" that bypassed judicial oversight. • The critics argue that these actions led to large-scale voter deletions, potentially disenfranchising citizens and eroding essential constitutional safeguards.