New Delhi: These are testing times for Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and her daughter Medha Roopam, the district magistrate of Gautam Buddh Nagar (Noida).
Even as her father faces calls for resignation from the post of CEC amid reports of acting unilaterally to implement the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, Roopam is at the centre of controversy too.
A lawyers’ body has written to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant questioning ‘out-of-turn’ listing of petitions filed by Roopam against an Allahabad High Court ruling over the detention of a student activist under the National Security Act (NSA).
In an open letter dated 24th September, the Lawyers Association for Constitution (LAFC) asked why Roopam’s challenge to the Allahabad HC order was heard by a bench of Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and N Kotiswar Singh.
LiveLaw reported that matters connected with preventive detention arising from the Noida workers’ protest were pending before a bench led by Justice BV Nagarathna, as per the Supreme Court roster in force from July 13.
The lawyers’ body highlighted that Roopam is the daughter of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, and argued that preferential treatment to a matter involving a senior public official’s family member could set a wrong precedent.
“The special listing before a particular bench has not enhanced confidence in the judicial process,” the letter said.
LAFC also objected to audio from the proceedings being muted and media access to the video-conferencing feed allegedly being restricted during the hearing.
During the hearing on September 23, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for Roopam, and senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi for the Uttar Pradesh government. However, the audio of the virtual proceedings was muted mid-way through the hearing.
The controversy relates to Roopam’s challenge to a September 2 Allahabad HC judgment concerning the detention of Delhi University student and activist Akriti Chaudhary under the NSA in connection with a workers’ protest in Noida in April.
Quashing Chaudhary’s detention, the high court directed that Rs 5 lakh be paid to her as compensation, with the amount to be recovered from salaries of Roopam and other officials involved in the detention. The high court made strong observations against the Noida administration.
After initially staying Allahabad High Court’s judgment, the Supreme Court later revised its order to clarify that the stay applies only to the former’s remarks against Roopam and its order on the Rs 5 lakh compensation to be deducted from her salary. The decision to quash Chaudhary’s NSA detention remains unchanged.
CJP flags ‘alarming’ precedent
The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) linked the development to the broader debate around CEC Kumar and the Election Commission.
“Since Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar is in the news, I have some very important but sad news to share about a Supreme Court judge,” CJP spokesperson Saurav Das said in a post on X.
Mentioning Justice Sharma’s role in the Medha Roopam matter, Das said it was “alarming”, and that there had been “no explanation from the judge’s side” for the muting of the proceedings.
🚨IMPORTANT NEWS🚨
Since Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar is in the news, I have some very important but sad news to share about a Supreme Court judge.
Supreme Court judge Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. Just two months away from retirement.
If you remember, the… pic.twitter.com/h6YRgYs14F
— Saurav Das (@SauravDassss) September 24, 2026
