The Press Information Bureau (PIB) on Monday, 5 October issued a fact-check clarifying that the Election Commission of India (ECI) has not removed its September 26 press note — which modified terms related to Form 6 for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) and directed Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to collect notice-related documents from voters' homes — from its official website. The clarification came in direct response to claims circulating on social media alleging the press note had been pulled down.

What the PIB Fact-Check Said

The PIB shared a direct link to the ECI website carrying the September 26 press note, labelling the contrary claims a 'fake news alert'. An ECI source echoed the bureau's position on Monday, stating: 'The September 26 press note is available on the ECI website. Was never taken down.'

The PIB, which functions as the Centre's nodal information-dissemination agency under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, also issued a broader advisory urging citizens — particularly those active on social media — to verify information before sharing. 'Do not share unverified videos or claims. Check information against credible, independently verifiable sources before accepting or sharing it,' the advisory read.

What the September 26 Note Had Covered

The ECI's September 26 press note had addressed multiple issues simultaneously: it extended SIR deadlines in Delhi and Maharashtra, countered allegations of internal friction within the Commission, and revised the procedural framework for SIR notice-related documentation. Critics had alleged the note was subsequently suppressed, a claim the PIB and ECI have now formally denied.

The Social Media Claim and Its Origin

The fact-check was triggered by claims made by Ashutosh Ranka of the Cockroach Janta Party on social media, who reportedly alleged the press note had been taken down. The PIB's intervention underscores ongoing concerns about the spread of unverified claims regarding electoral processes, particularly in the lead-up to key state elections.

Supreme Court Hearing on ECI Powers

Separately, on the same day, the Supreme Court issued a notice to both the Centre and the ECI on a petition challenging the manner in which the poll panel's powers are being exercised. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana sought responses from all three Election Commissioners.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the credibility of the ECI had been undermined and that Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar was acting contrary to the statutory framework governing the multi-member body — specifically, that the CEC was individually exercising powers vested in the full Commission.

The bench observed that Commissioners were expected to take decisions unanimously and that, in the absence of unanimity, matters should be decided by majority. It also noted that authenticated information on the allegations would be required before any action. 'Let's first have authenticated information on that. We can always annul any decision,' the court stated.

Singh alternatively urged the court to direct that all ECI decisions be taken only unanimously until the next date of hearing, a request the bench did not immediately accept.

What Comes Next

The Supreme Court's notice sets up a legally significant hearing on the institutional functioning of the poll body at a time when its procedures are already under public scrutiny. How the ECI and the Centre respond to the court's queries could shape the contours of electoral administration in the months ahead.