Claim
The Congress fought the SIR case in the Supreme Court and lost it, and is now writing letter after letter instead.
“हैव यू फॉट द केस इन सुप्रीम कोर्ट? इफ यू फॉट द केस एंड लॉस्ट इट इन सुप्रीम कोर्ट, व्हाई आर यू राइटिंग चिट्ठी पे चिट्ठी?”▶ Watch source segment
Rationale
The core factual claim is correct: petitions challenging the Bihar SIR were heard in the Supreme Court, Congress (via MP K.C. Venugopal) was among the petitioners, and on 27 May 2026 the Court upheld the SIR and rejected the challenges — so the anti-SIR side, including Congress, lost. The 'writing letter after letter' portion is the anchor's rhetorical characterisation of Congress's subsequent correspondence with the ECI rather than a discrete checkable fact, but the verifiable assertion (fought the SIR case in the Supreme Court and lost) is accurate. Minor nuance: the lead petitioner was the non-partisan Association for Democratic Reforms, with Congress one of many co-petitioners, so framing it as purely 'the Congress' case slightly overstates its role.
Evidence
- https://www.scobserver.in/reports/supreme-court-backs-bihar-sir-exercise-upholds-ecis-powers-to-purify-electoral-rolls/ On 27 May 2026 the Supreme Court upheld the ECI's Bihar SIR as constitutionally valid and rejected the challenges; the Congress was among the political parties that opposed the exercise, meaning the challenge failed. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://www.scobserver.in/cases/challenge-to-the-ecis-revision-of-electoral-rolls-in-bihar-sir-association-for-democratic-reforms-v-election-commission-of-india/ Case record showing the cluster of writ petitions (ADR v ECI) challenging the Bihar SIR, in which Congress MP K.C. Venugopal was among the petitioners. ✓ reachable · archived
- https://verfassungsblog.de/sir-judgment-supreme-court-india-election-commission/ Analysis confirming the 27 May 2026 SIR judgment (ADR & Ors. v ECI) arose from petitions challenging the SIR and that the Court upheld the ECI's exercise. ✓ reachable · archived