The Gauhati High Court directed the respondents—the Centre, Assam Government, Election Commission of India, and State Electoral Officer—to file their replies before February 24, the date of the hearing. . File
Guwahati
The Gauhati High Court on Wednesday (January 28, 2026) listed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking judicial intervention into the alleged large-scale misuse of objections during Assam’s Special Revision of electoral rolls, amid a controversy over remarks made by Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma.
The PIL, filed by advocate F.Z. Mazumder under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges what the petitioner describes as false, fraudulent, and mala fide filing of Form-7 objections during the revision exercise ahead of the 2026 Assam Assembly elections.
The petition alleges impersonation, identity misuse, and a failure of the election authorities and the State administration to conduct a transparent enquiry or initiate penal action against those responsible.
Mr. Mazumder has sought the constitution of a high-level independent judicial enquiry, preferably headed by a sitting or retired judge, to examine the alleged abuse of the statutory objection mechanism and to ensure that no voter is deleted from the rolls based on disputed or forged complaints.
He said that the election authorities’ inaction enabled arbitrary deletion proceedings, compelling lawful voters to defend their right to vote based on fraudulent complaints.
The PIL cited extensive media reports from late January detailing instances of voters wrongly marked as “dead” or “shifted”, and of individuals named as complainants who denied filing objections altogether. The petitioner argued that the alleged misuse threatens the constitutional mandate of free and fair elections and disproportionately impacts marginalised and less-literate voters.
The court directed the respondents—the Centre, Assam Government, Election Commission of India, and State Electoral Officer—to file their replies before February 24, the date of the hearing.
Potentially inflammatory
The court listing came on the day the Assam unit of Trinamool Congress (TMC) issued a statement, objecting to the Chief Minister’s remarks on alleged “vote theft” during the Special Revision process.
In a letter to the Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court, TMC’s State senior Vice-President Dulu Ahmed said the Chief Minister publicly acknowledged irregularities in the voter revision exercise but failed to order action against those allegedly involved.
The letter said that despite opposition parties submitting information related to alleged manipulation to the Election Commission, no visible steps were taken. It further objected to the Chief Minister’s alleged use of ‘Miya’, a pejorative term for Bengali-speaking Muslims, and calls for social and economic exclusion of the community.
Mr. Ahmed said the Chief Minister’s public statements allegedly include “indications of removal of names of genuine Muslim voters from the electoral rolls, with mala fide intention and without any basis.” He also said that such “repeated communal references” have the “potential to inflame religious sentiments and disturb the order amongst Hindus and Muslims” in Assam.
Seeking guidelines restraining public functionaries from making statements that may incite communal disharmony, he requested the court to direct the Assam Government and the Election Commission to ensure that the ongoing Special Revision of poll rolls is conducted strictly in accordance with the law, without religious or communal bias.
According to the draft electoral roll published on December 27, 2025, Assam has 2.51 crore voters after 4.78 lakh were marked dead and 5.23 lakh were found shifted, while 53,619 multiple entries were deleted. The poll authorities claimed 100% verification covering more than 61 lakh households
On January 25, six opposition parties—Congress, Raijor Dal, Assam Jatiya Parishad, CPI, CPI(M), and CPI(M-L)—submitted a memorandum to the State’s Chief Electoral Officer, alleging widespread legal violations, political interference, and targeted harassment of genuine voters during the SR exercise, which they claimed was “arbitrary, unlawful, and unconstitutional”.
Published – January 28, 2026 11:38 pm IST
