There is no provision in the Constitution to prevent the appointing of either a fool or a knave or a person who is likely to be under the thumb of the executive.
(-Dr B R Ambedkar, Constituent Assembly debate, June 16, 1949)Seventy-seven years later, India may be confronting the very scenario that the Father of the Indian Constitution, Dr B.R. Ambedkar, warned against. An institution meant to protect the country’s electoral democracy is now facing unprecedented questions over its credibility.
What began as an exercise to ‘sanitize’ electoral rolls has, for its critics, come to be associated with allegations of ‘vote chori’.
Gyanesh Kumar has become the first Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in India’s history to face notices in Parliament seeking his removal.
From politicians to ordinary citizens, calls for answers and for Kumar’s resignation are growing, accompanied by protests demanding his removal as Chief Election Commissioner.
But can Gyanesh Kumar actually be removed?
Removing a CEC in India is not as simple as the government deciding to remove an official.
The CEC has special constitutional protection to ensure that the Election Commission can function independently and is not controlled by the government of the day.
A CEC in India can be removed only through a difficult, court-like impeachment process set by the Constitution, not by the government or the President alone.
The Constitution allows removal only on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
Serious misconduct or abuse of office could fall under misbehaviour, while incapacity refers to an inability to perform the duties of the office.
Political disagreement or an unpopular decision, by itself, is not a ground for removal.
The process is similar to the one used for removing a Supreme Court judge and begins in Parliament.
A notice of motion alleging misbehaviour or incapacity must be signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha can then consider whether to admit the motion.
If the motion is admitted, an inquiry committee is constituted to examine the allegations and evidence. The committee has to determine whether the charges are proved.
The process is therefore not simply a political vote to remove the CEC; the allegations have to go through a formal inquiry.
If the charges are found to be proved, both Houses of Parliament must pass an address to the President seeking the CEC’s removal.
This requires a special majority in each House, a majority of the total membership of the House and at least two-thirds of the members present and voting. Both Houses must pass the address in the same session.
The President can issue the order removing the CEC only after both Houses of Parliament approve the address.
So, while Parliament can initiate the process, removing a CEC requires multiple constitutional safeguards and a very high threshold of support.
Impeachment notices against CEC Gyanesh Kumar have been submitted three times in Parliament by the opposition (plus one ‘people’s impeachment’* outside Parliament)
*The ‘people’s impeachment’ is a symbolic public chargesheet issued by retired civil servants, activists and academics against CEC Gyanesh Kumar. It has no legal or parliamentary force, but is meant to express a loss of public trust and demand his resignation.
The first notice, submitted in March 2026 and signed by 130 Lok Sabha and 63 Rajya Sabha MPs, was rejected by the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman in April. They said the notices lacked sufficient credible material to establish a prima facie case of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
A second notice, submitted in the Rajya Sabha in April and signed by 73 Opposition MPs, listed nine allegations. It remained pending and did not lead to the formation of an inquiry committee.
By September–October, Opposition parties were preparing a third parliamentary notice, but it had not been admitted as of early October.
So far, none of the parliamentary attempts has resulted in a formal impeachment inquiry or removal process against Gyanesh Kumar.
The protection for the CEC is stronger than that available to the other Election Commissioners. Under Article 324(5), an Election Commissioner can be removed by the President on the recommendation of the CEC. This means the Constitution sets a significantly higher threshold for removing the CEC than for removing the other Election Commissioners.
Yes, but not simply because Parliament or the public demands it. Gyanesh Kumar can be removed only through the extremely difficult constitutional process outlined above.
It requires an inquiry, approval by both Houses of Parliament with a special majority, and finally an order from the President.
But there is another route: resignation.
A CEC can voluntarily resign by submitting a written resignation to the President. This is separate from the constitutional removal process and does not require an impeachment motion or a vote in Parliament.
This is the route the Opposition, CJP and other groups demanding Kumar’s exit are currently seeking, with calls for him to step down growing louder in recent days.