Supreme Court Issues Notice to Rahul Gandhi and Akhilesh Yadav Over October 12 March

Category: India News | Law & Judiciary

NEW DELHI, October 18, 2026: The Supreme Court of India has issued notices to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav and several other opposition figures following a march towards the court on October 12. The demonstration was linked to allegations of irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi took up a petition seeking guidelines to regulate political demonstrations and processions in and around judicial premises. The petition also sought contempt proceedings against certain political leaders over their participation in the march.

Supreme Court Notice to Rahul Gandhi: What Is the Case About?

Court raises concerns over demonstrations near judicial premises

During the proceedings, the Chief Justice emphasised that the judiciary must remain independent and protected from attempts to exert pressure through public demonstrations. The court made clear that issuing notices did not amount to approval of the conduct being questioned.

The bench also directed that CCTV footage and other relevant digital evidence relating to the October 12 incident be preserved. The responses of the leaders and other parties will help the court examine the allegations and determine the next steps in the proceedings.

Dispute centres on electoral roll revision

The opposition march followed concerns raised by several INDIA bloc leaders regarding the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. Opposition representatives have alleged that the process could result in the wrongful deletion of eligible voters and have called for greater transparency.

The leaders sought judicial intervention over the electoral roll process and raised questions about the functioning of the Election Commission. These allegations remain matters for examination and should not be treated as established findings.

The Supreme Court has separately sought responses from the Election Commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and other election commissioners in proceedings concerning the opposition's challenge to the SIR process.

What happens next?

The notices require the concerned parties to respond to the issues raised in the petitions. The court will consider their submissions before deciding whether further directions or proceedings are warranted.

The case brings two important questions into focus: how political parties can raise concerns about electoral processes and how demonstrations near judicial institutions should be regulated without undermining democratic expression or the independence of the judiciary.

Further developments will depend on the responses filed before the Supreme Court and its subsequent orders.