Guwahati: The Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had not taken a position on whether the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) revised Form 6 for voter registration should be approved or rejected.
First-time voter registration applicants are required to fill out Form 6, which the ECI is using in its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls across several states.
The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the revised form was not available when the court heard the Bihar SIR case. It clarified that its October 5 observations did not amount to approval or rejection of the changes.
The court had stated on October 5 that it had not approved any changes to Form 6.
The bench revisited the issue on Monday, explaining that the modification had never been brought before it, so it had not considered whether to approve or reject it.
“What was said was that when the Bihar SIR matter was before us, the new Form 6 was not there. That does not mean it was either approved or disapproved by the Supreme Court,” Justice Bagchi said.
The clarification came after a petitioner alleged that the ECI had portrayed the revised Form 6 as a modification approved by the Supreme Court.
The petitioner’s counsel referred to the court’s October 5 observations and said, “On October 5, this Court had already declared that Form 6 was not approved by the Supreme Court of India. But the Election Commission has published that the altered Form 6 has been approved by the Supreme Court. This is very important. I am seeking a direction regarding this.”
The Chief Justice responded that the court had not received any application concerning the revised form. He told the lawyer not to interpret the court’s remarks as a decision on its approval status.
The controversy arose after the ECI added a declaration to the revised Form 6 asking applicants to confirm whether their own name, or that of a parent or grandparent, appeared on an electoral roll from an earlier SIR.
Critics say the additional condition could make registration harder for first-time voters, particularly those whose families were not listed on older electoral rolls.
They have also questioned the ECI’s authority to revise a statutory form without following the required procedure to amend the relevant rules.
The declaration reportedly drew objections from Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, who reportedly raised concerns about introducing the requirement without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
Reports that applicants could not submit the online form without answering the declaration added to the controversy, although the requirement was not marked as mandatory.
In a September 26 press note, the ECI said the Supreme Court had upheld the additional declaration attached to Form 6 for the SIR.
However, the Supreme Court said on October 5 that it had not approved the modification.
The bench, on Monday, clarified that it had neither approved nor rejected the revised form because the matter had never been brought before it for consideration.