Thanks for listening and your comments. I know you listened without score, but I want to give a more extensive explanation of my thinking here, as others will probably want to read it as well. The rests in this prelude have stirred up some controversy!
Some like it, some don't, and others are either neutral or didn't hear anything amiss.
The piece is in 3/4 and every time Scriabin shows a quarter rest for the second beat in the treble clef, he also has a half note on the first beat of those measures to be held by finger pedaling for full value until the third beat. Any quarter notes in the first beat are released before the second beat, of course, only leaving the top half notes sounding to that point. The bass clef is three triplets per measure. Clearly, with the first-beat half notes held in the right hand, he has already signified that there are truly three beats present in the treble clef measure as required by the time signature, thereby making the quarter rests he wrote on the second beats in the treble clef following the released quarter notes redundant, given the held half notes. Or if that was not his intent, then he could have written the first-beat notes ALL as half note chords, exactly as he did in measures 8, 17, 21, 26, 27. Likewise, in the measures in question, if he wanted continuing sound of all voices in the chords of the first beats, then he should never have written the quarter rests on the second beats! Because he did in fact explicitly write in those quarter rests on the second beats, then it would seem that he actually wanted the silence of those first-beat quarter notes to be absolute.
Probably some would advocate that I should have pedaled through the rests to regardless to better maintain the romantic mood overall. But then other listeners might take issue that I ignored the quarter rests or wasn't reading the score carefully. When playing a short coda of a piece, I'll sometimes take a liberty and pedal through the rests there if it appreciably extends the mood of a piece a la morendo. But that is a different scenario.
This matter of interpretation, which must be justified by the score, music theory, and/or performance practices, would likely have adherents on both sides in my opinion. I couldn't find a Scriabin or Sofrinitsky recording to hear the earliest performance practices. Modern day pianists tend to play through the rests, but that's not to say they are correct in doing so. The score shows the rests in question occur in eight measures, while similar figuration without the rests appear in five instances, which suggests to me that Scriabin was definitely calling for contrast in sound rather than uniformity. As far as music theory goes, a rest means silence (usually).