The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed that the Rajasthan Cricket Association (RCA) elections scheduled for today at 11:30 AM may proceed, while ordering that the election results be kept in a sealed cover pending adjudication of the challenge raised by former Indian women’s cricketer.

Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for petitioner Megha Gaur, alleged that there was not a single woman voter or woman candidate in the electoral process, in violation of the Rajasthan Cricket Association’s 2022 Rules, the association’s Constitution and the applicable statutory framework.

Guruswamy submitted that the election was being pushed through in undue haste despite alleged violations of the Supreme Court’s orders, the Central Act, the RCA Constitution and orders passed by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies.

She sought a stay on the election, arguing that the process was being conducted without any representation of women.

She sought a stay on the election, contending that the process was “patently unfair and illegal” and excluded women from participation. They also sought tagging of the matter with the pending proceedings concerning the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). She also pointed out that, in an earlier matter concerning another sport, the Supreme Court had directed representation for women, and argued that similar principles should apply to cricket.

The Bench, however, noted that stopping the election at that stage could create considerable complications and turmoil. It suggested that the voting process could go ahead, while the declaration of results would remain subject to the outcome of the legal challenge.

The Bench asked the petitioner to place the challenge before the Rajasthan High Court. Guruswamy, however, submitted that the Supreme Court was already examining issues concerning electoral rolls and the National Sports Governance Act, 2025 in the pending BCCI matter. She argued that the absence of women from the electoral roll necessarily meant that women could not contest the election either.

Guruswamy further sought that the matter be tagged with the pending BCCI proceedings before the Supreme Court, submitting that the issues concerning the governance and functioning of cricket associations were already being examined in that matter.

The Bench ultimately allowed them to move an IA in the BCCI matter. At the same time, it declined to halt the polling at that stage, but directed that the results should not be declared and instead be kept in a sealed envelope.

Counsel appearing for the RCA/State submitted that the Rajasthan High Court had appointed the Home Secretary as Administrator of the RCA and that the election was being conducted pursuant to that arrangement. It was also submitted that the issue was already pending before the High Court.

The Bench observed that whether the Rajasthan Cricket Association Act or the statutory framework otherwise would govern the election were issues to be adjudicated. The Court then directed that the election could proceed but the results would remain sealed, while asking the High Court to hear the matter and the pending application expeditiously.

Ultimately, the Court directed that the election scheduled for the day could take place, but the results were to be kept in a sealed cover. The Bench noted that declaring the results immediately could complicate the situation if the petitioners subsequently succeeded in their challenge before the High Court.