The Supreme Court has cautioned the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) to present its arguments regarding the Election Commission's (EC) voter list validation methods within legal boundaries, following strong remarks made by advocate Prashant Bhushan. Bhushan referred to the EC as a "despot," which prompted the court's intervention.

The court's reprimand came in response to unsupported allegations made by the ADR concerning the EC's procedures. The specific details of the allegations and the EC's validation methods were not detailed in the available news snippets. However, the court emphasized the importance of substantiating claims with evidence and adhering to legal norms when challenging the Election Commission's actions.

This development occurs against the backdrop of other election-related news. The Supreme Court has also asked the Election Commission to consider extending the deadline for Kerala's electoral roll revision. Additionally, there are reports of a teacher on roll-revision duty dying in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, bringing the total toll to nine in the state.

The Supreme Court's direction to the ADR underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that electoral processes are scrutinized responsibly and that allegations against constitutional bodies like the Election Commission are based on solid footing. The court's intervention highlights the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain the integrity and credibility of electoral institutions. The case is a reminder that while raising concerns about electoral processes is vital for a healthy democracy, such concerns must be articulated within the framework of the law and supported by evidence.