Wed Sep 10 17:33:16 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary of the article, followed by a rewritten version in news article format:

**Summary:**

The Congress party, led by spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi, is accusing the Election Commission of India (ECI) of targeting senior party leader Pawan Khera. This stems from a notice issued to Khera regarding alleged duplicate voter registration. The Congress claims the ECI’s actions are opaque, lack accountability, and were done without proper consultation. They argue Khera disclosed his prior registration when relocating, and that the ECI publicly released the notice before allowing him to respond, suggesting a pre-determined judgment. Singhvi further criticized the ECI’s resistance to using Aadhaar as proof of identity and its rushed Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

**News Article:**

**Congress Accuses ECI of Targeting Pawan Khera, Citing Opacity and Lack of Consultation**

**NEW DELHI, September 10, 2025** – The Congress party today sharply criticized the Election Commission of India (ECI), accusing the poll body of targeting senior leader Pawan Khera with a notice regarding alleged duplicate voter registration. At a press conference held at the AICC headquarters, spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi claimed the ECI’s actions demonstrate a pattern of opacity, lack of accountability, and resistance to transparency.

The controversy stems from a show-cause notice issued by the Delhi District Election Office to Khera regarding two electoral photo identity cards (EPIC). Singhvi, a senior advocate, argued that the ECI prematurely publicized the notice on social media before allowing Khera to respond, a move he deemed prejudicial and without legal basis.

“The public dissemination of the show-cause notice makes it clear that the EC has already pre-adjudicated the issue against Mr. Khera,” Singhvi stated.

The Congress maintains that Khera acted within the law when relocating to a new constituency in 2017, submitting the required Form 6 and disclosing his previous registration details. Singhvi questioned why the ECI did not investigate its own records before issuing the public notice.

Singhvi also raised broader concerns about the ECI’s approach, referencing its initial resistance to accepting Aadhaar as proof of identity, despite court suggestions, and the sudden implementation of a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. He argued the ECI failed to consult with stakeholders before launching the SIR and provided no justifiable reason for its rushed implementation.

“Despite repeated concerns raised by political parties, civil society, and citizens, the EC has chosen opacity over transparency, silence over accountability, and reluctance over responsibility,” Singhvi concluded.

The ECI has yet to respond to the Congress party’s accusations. The incident raises questions about the impartiality of the ECI and its handling of voter registration matters. The controversy is likely to intensify scrutiny of the ECI in the lead-up to future elections.

Read More