SIR row: Supreme Court questions Form 6 modification, says it never approved changes

Guwahati: The Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had not approved any modification to Form 6, the statutory application used by people seeking to register as voters for the first time, during the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, made the observation while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking action against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar.

The petition was filed in the wake of a The Indian Express investigation which reported that Kumar had taken several decisions relating to the SIR without the concurrence of the other two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.

During Monday’s hearing, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the petitioner, raised concerns over modifications made to Form 6, which is used by eligible citizens to seek inclusion in electoral rolls.

Responding to the submission, CJI Surya Kant said: “Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let us be clear. When the record is produced, we would like to see who has modified.”

The modified Form 6 introduced an additional declaration requiring applicants seeking inclusion in electoral rolls to state whether their own name, or that of a parent or grandparent, appeared in an earlier SIR-era electoral roll.

The change has been criticised on the ground that it could create an additional hurdle for first-time voters, particularly those whose families were not included in the earlier rolls. Critics have also questioned whether the ECI could alter a statutory form without following the procedure for amending the relevant rules.

The additional requirement had reportedly drawn objections from Sandhu and Joshi. The two had objected to the declaration being incorporated without an amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

The issue was further complicated by reports that applicants could not submit the online form without answering the declaration, even though the field was not marked as mandatory.

The Supreme Court’s clarification came days after the ECI said in a September 26 press note that the additional declaration attached to Form 6 during the SIR had been upheld by the court.

“The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. For non-SIR period, the Forms applicable as per Rules (the Registration of Electors Rules 1960) will be used,” the ECI had said.

The ECI was referring to the Supreme Court’s May 27, 2026, judgment concerning the SIR exercise in Bihar, in which the court considered the ECI’s power to require additional documentation during electoral roll revision. The additional declaration currently attached to Form 6 was introduced subsequently.

The ECI has maintained that Form 6 itself was not amended and that the declaration was an additional requirement applicable during the SIR exercise.

The latest hearing came two weeks after The Indian Express investigation revealed that Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months to decisions and orders issued without their knowledge.

The newspaper had also reported that Sandhu, on August 13, described the changes to Form 6 as “unauthorised and illegal” and called for their immediate removal.

Under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the report said, only the Central government can amend the forms relating to voter enrolment, deletion and correction.

On September 26, the ECI announced that the SIR-related declaration in Form 6 had been removed from the ECINET application portal in states where the SIR had concluded. The declaration, however, remained in states where the exercise was still underway.

The ECI said: “For non-SIR period, the Forms applicable as per Rules (the Registration of Electors Rules 1960) will be used.”

The ECI’s press note did not specify who had introduced the additional question in the online form or why it remained in place after Sandhu had described the modification as unauthorised and illegal.

Form 6 is the statutory application for people who have newly become eligible to vote after turning 18, acquired Indian citizenship or whose names were deleted from electoral rolls and who wish to apply afresh.

The existing Form 6, prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, requires applicants to provide the name and EPIC number of family members with whom they currently reside.

The online version of Form 6 available on ECINET contained a new declaration related to the SIR, according to reports published in july.

Applicants were asked to indicate whether their name appeared in the electoral roll during the last SIR held in the early 2000s, whether the name of a parent or grandparent appeared in that roll, or whether neither their name nor that of their parents appeared in it.

Applicants whose names appeared in the earlier SIR were also asked to provide the Assembly constituency number, polling booth or part number and serial number at which their father or mother was registered in that roll.

The Form 6 available for download on the ECI portal, however, did not contain the additional declaration.

After reports on the updated Form 6 on ECINET in July, Sandhu placed on record on August 13 that the change was “unauthorised and illegal” and “must be removed immediately”.

The two Election Commissioners had objected to the modification on the ground that it was introduced without an amendment to the relevant rules.

On September 26, the ECI said the SIR declaration had been removed from Form 6 on ECINET in states where the SIR had concluded, while retaining it in states where the exercise was continuing.

Article 326 of the Constitution provides for enrolment as an elector for adult citizens who are ordinarily resident in a particular Assembly constituency, subject to disqualification under law.

The Representation of the People Act, 1950, empowers the Union government to make rules concerning elections and registration of electors.

Section 28 of the Act allows the Central government, after consulting the Election Commission, to make rules through notification in the Official Gazette. Such rules are required to be laid before both Houses of Parliament.

Form 6 forms part of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, framed under the Act. Any change to the form would therefore require an amendment and gazette notification by the Ministry of Law and Justice, according to the report.

However, no such amendment was notified by the ministry in the notifications available on the e-Gazette website from June 24, 2025, when the ECI first announced the SIR.