No, Indian Express Didn’t Retract or Refute Its Report on ECI and CEC

The viral claim about The Indian Express refuting the findings of its article about election comissioners' is false.

A viral text message falsely claims that The Indian Express reversed course and admitted its reporting was incorrect after publishing an investigative piece by Ritika Chopra critiquing the Election Commission.

(Source: Facebook/Indian Express/Altered by The Quint)

A text message, based on Indian Express' report on the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar by journalist Ritika Chopra, has gone viral on the internet.

What does it say?: Referring to a second article by journalist Damini Nath, the text claims that the publication took a "shameful U-turn" from Chopra's initial report.

• The message states, "the Express has added an "Explained" supplement and published an article explaining that what it previously stated is incorrect and is leading to false conclusions."

• Calling Chopra's article "slanderous," it goes on the say that Nath's report contradicted the former, which had allegedly created a false impression of serious dysfunction or disagreement within the ECI.

• Additionally, the claim targets Chopra, stating that her coverage was "agenda-driven" as she had never reported on the ECI before, while Nath routinely did so.

An archived version of this post can be seen here.

(Source: Facebook/Screenshot)

The Quint also received a query to verify this claim on its WhatsApp tipline.

(Archived versions of more posts sharing this claim can be seen here and here.)

Is it true?: No, the claim is incorrect or misleading on several counts.

Here's how we found out the truth:

To start with, we went through Nath's article, titled 'T N Seshan, N Gopalaswami, Ashok Lavasa: When Election Commission members differed', which was published on 26 September 2026.

At no point in her article did Nath say, or insinuate, that the facts and details of Chopra's article were "incorrect" or that they "led to a false conclusion."

• Throughout her report, Nath highlighted past instances of disagreements and dissent among the panel of Election Commissioners, mentioning how dissent notes were officially recorded in files.

• Her article highlights how before the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls began in 2025, "Election Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu had observed on the draft order that the exercise should not lead to harassment to voters and citizens."

• None of Nath's statements or observations refute the findings of Chopra's report, as claimed.

The claim also states that Nath said, "proposals related to the SIR have been passed unanimously and with the signatures of all three commissioners. Therefore, there is no reason to debate it."

• This is also false, as these portions have been taken from a part of the article which mention the ECI's statement after Chopra's report was released, and are not Nath's statements as claimed.

(Source: Indian Express/Screenshot)

• Lastly, the claim attempts to target Chopra by saying that she had "not covered any news about the Commission to date."

• This, too, is categorically false. A quick look at Chopra's author page on the Indian Express' website showed us multiple articles on the ECI which include but are not limited to those published in 2021, 2023, 2024, and 2025.

Conclusion: The statements made in the viral text are misleading on several counts.

(Not convinced of a post or information you came across online and want it verified? Send us the details on WhatsApp at 9540511818 , or e-mail it to us at [e-mail] and we'll fact-check it for you. You can also read all our fact-checked stories here.)