Jubilee Post News & Views
Dr. Utkarsh Sinha
The foundation of Indian democracy rests on constitutional institutions. These institutions—whether the Election Commission, the judiciary, or the executive—are pillars of impartiality, transparency, and accountability. However, in recent years, the trend of raising questions on these very institutions has intensified. Allegations like “vote theft” from opposition parties have further inflamed this debate.
In this very context, on 19 November 2025, an open letter surfaced signed by 272 retired judges, bureaucrats, diplomats, and armed forces officers that directly targeted Rahul Gandhi, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the Congress party.
Titled “Assault on National Constitutional Authorities”, the letter describes Rahul Gandhi’s accusations against the Election Commission as the outcome of “venomous rhetoric” and “unsubstantiated allegations”.
This is no ordinary document. It carries the signatures of: 16 retired judges,123 former bureaucrats (including 14 former ambassadors),133 retired armed forces officers.
Prominent names include former J&K DGP S.P. Vaid, former RAW chief Sanjeev Tripathi, former IFS officer Lakshmi Puri, former Delhi High Court judge S.N. Dhingra, former Supreme Court judge Adarsh Kumar Goel, former NIA Director Y.C. Modi, and former Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary Deepak Singhal. The letter calls Rahul Gandhi’s “vote theft” campaign “impotent rage born out of repeated electoral failure”.
But now, ever since this letter was released, the past of these 272 signatories has started coming under the scanner. Serious questions are being raised: Are these people speaking of their own free will, or was there pressure on them? And is this episode proving that morality has become irrelevant in public life?
The Background of the Letter
First, it is essential to understand the context. After the NDA’s massive victory in the 2025 Bihar Assembly elections, the Congress levelled allegations of “vote theft”. Rahul Gandhi held three press conferences in which he called the Election Commission “BJP’s B-team” and claimed he possessed “100% proof” that would expose the Commission like a “nuclear bomb”. He declared, “I will not spare Election Commission officials from top to bottom” and went so far as to label the Commission’s actions as “treason”. The Congress raised doubts over the Systematic Voters’ Information Retrieval (SIR) process and alleged that 25 lakh votes were stolen in states like Haryana.
The Election Commission termed these allegations “unverified” and asked Rahul Gandhi to submit an affidavit and specific details. No formal complaint was filed. It was in this backdrop that the letter emerged.
The signatories wrote that Rahul Gandhi has earlier attacked the armed forces, judiciary, Parliament, and now the Election Commission. They stated: “These allegations are an attempt to create an illusion of institutional crisis, whereas the Commission has made its procedure public and verification has been done under judicial oversight.” The letter holds the Congress responsible for “lack of policy alternatives” and says the opposition is hiding its electoral defeats by blaming institutions.
This letter appears to be part of a tradition in Indian civil society. In 2020 too, retired officials had written letters against CAA-NRC, but here the tone is exactly the opposite. This letter is reportedly linked to BJP-leaning organisations such as the ‘Constitutional Conclave’, which claims to protect constitutional institutions.
The Controversial Past of the Signatories
Immediately after the letter was released, social media and independent journalists began digging into the past of these 272 individuals. The revelations have been shocking. Many signatories have deep ties with the BJP and the RSS. For example: Sanjeev Tripathi: Former RAW chief, now associated with the BJP; remained active during the Modi government since 2014 and supported BJP policies in intelligence agencies. Lakshmi Puri: Former IFS officer and wife of Union Minister Hardeep Puri; her family is considered close to the Modi government. S.N. Dhingra: Former Delhi High Court judge who adopted a pro-BJP stance in several verdicts. Adarsh Kumar Goel: Former Supreme Court judge and NGT chairman, known to be favourable to the Modi government in environmental matters. Y.C. Modi: Former NIA Director appointed by the Modi government and central to its anti-terror policies. Deepak Singhal: Former Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary, active during the Yogi Adityanath (BJP) government.
Here are some additional names that have now come into sharp focus, all of them surrounded by serious allegations of corruption: Hemant Gupta: Former Supreme Court judge and one of the signatories of the letter. In 2023, a petition was filed against him in the Delhi High Court alleging that ₹5 crore in cash and 2 kg of gold were recovered from his residence. The case is linked to an Income Tax raid, with allegations that he earned illegal income through post-retirement advisory roles. Gupta dismissed the charges as a political conspiracy, but the investigation is still ongoing. Rajeev Lochan: Former High Court judge. In 2022, the CBI registered a corruption case against him. ₹3 crore in cash was seized from his residence, allegedly linked to a land scam. He had been appointed as an advisor to a ministry in a BJP-ruled state, and the opposition called it a classic example of “corruption in exchange for protecting the ruling establishment”. Vivek Sharma: Former Gujarat High Court judge and a signatory. In 2024, the Enforcement Directorate opened a money-laundering case against him. 1.5 kg gold and ₹2 crore in cash were recovered from his premises, allegedly connected to corporate donations. Sharma stands accused of acting as a middleman in a major BJP-backed infrastructure project. Naveen Kumar: Former IAS officer. His name surfaced in 2021 in a cash-for-favour scandal in Bihar. From his farmhouse in Patna, ₹8 crore in cash and 10 kg of gold were seized. Kumar had been transferred to Uttar Pradesh during the Yogi government and is considered close to the BJP.
These additional revelations have further intensified questions about the moral standing and independence of several signatories of the 272-member letter.
The hashtag #272SignatoriesPast trended on social media, with users claiming that more than 70% of the signatories are linked to the BJP. Questions were also raised about former Karnataka Chief Justice Shubhro Kamal Mukherjee, who has been attending BJP events after retirement. Former J&K DGP S.P. Vaid, a vocal supporter of the abrogation of Article 370, was also targeted. One tweet read: “These 272 are not independent voices but an echo chamber of the ruling establishment.”
These revelations have cast serious doubt on the credibility of the letter. Are these retired officials truly representatives of “civil society”, or are they pushing the agenda of the ruling party? The opposition has called it an “organised attack, while the BJP has hailed it as the “defence of democracy”.
The Question of Pressure: Are Retired Officials Truly Independent?
Now comes the core question: Was there any pressure on these 272 individuals?
In India, the role of retired officials has always been complex. Even after retirement, pension, security, and social prestige remain dependent on those in power. In the decade of the Modi government, many former bureaucrats have been rewarded with Rajya Sabha seats, governorships, or advisory roles—just like Sanjeev Tripathi. Is this letter part of the same “lobby”?
Signs of pressure are evident. The letter appeared immediately after Congress’s defeat in Bihar and when Rahul Gandhi’s allegations were at their peak. The BJP launched a counter-attack by calling it an “opposition conspiracy”. Groups of retired officials have previously written letters in favour of the government on CAA (2019) and the farmers’ movement (2020). According to reports, many of these signatories are associated with RSS-inspired organisations like the Foundation for Restoring India.
On the other hand, there is no concrete evidence of direct governmental pressure. Yet indirect pressure cannot be ruled out. After retirement, judges receive post-retirement assignments outside the collegium system; bureaucrats get post-retirement jobs. In 2023, a former chief secretary had admitted, “The government’s eye always remains on us.” If these 272 are writing of their own free will—fine. But if there is pressure, it poses a grave danger to democracy. The opposition argues that this is an extension of the “troll army” where retired officials have turned into propagandists for the ruling party.
The Crisis of Morality: Has Morality Become Irrelevant?
Now the deepest question: Has morality become irrelevant?
In Indian democracy, morality was never a formal rule, but it was an expected value. Retired officials were expected to remain impartial. But polarisation has changed everything. Rahul Gandhi’s allegations lack evidence—that is morally questionable. But a letter from 272 individuals with partisan histories is also a violation of moral standards.
Signs of morality becoming irrelevant are visible everywhere. In politics, emotionally charged terms like “vote theft” erode public trust in institutions. Retired officials are expected to remain neutral, yet lured by positions and benefits, they migrate to the ruling camp. Since 2014, more than 50 retired bureaucrats have joined the BJP. This is moral decay—where principles lose to political gain.
Yet morality has not become entirely irrelevant altogether. This letter has sparked a debate: Should retired officials speak out or remain silent? Rahul Gandhi must present evidence, and the Election Commission, instead of dismissing the allegations, should provide proof of their baselessness. Both sides must shoulder moral responsibility. Otherwise, democracy will become a mere game of institutions, and morality remains confined to books.
The Need for Debate, Not Division
This entire episode is a mirror of Indian democracy. The letter by 272 retired officials, their controversial past, questions of pressure, and the crisis of morality—everything together sounds a warning bell. Whether there was pressure or not is a matter of discussion, but it increasingly appears that morality may indeed have become irrelevant.
