The ECI’s opinion that the additional declaration is not part of Form 6 comes days after the SC said it will examine the ‘new’ Form 6

Image is for representation only | Photo credit: The Hindu

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has put forward a razor-sharp justification for claims that it had wrongfully amended Form 6 to introduce extra-legal requirements for voters whose names were deleted in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) to return to the electoral roll.

The European Citizens’ Initiative has introduced an additional declaration form alongside Form 6, which requires these voters to provide details of their previous entries on the electoral roll or their parents’ or grandparents’ details. ECI calls this exercise “mapping”. Any perceived inconsistency of the lack of detail in this regard is generally called a “logical contradiction”. In Delhi alone, there were initially 33.12 million cases of “non-mapping” or “logical discrepancies”.

CEC LIVE line update

The petitioners in the Supreme Court argued that the additional declaration form was an illegal amendment to Form 6. Form 6 could not be unilaterally amended by the EOI. That was the Centre’s job, not the EOI’s.

An affidavit showing a united face between Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, Election Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi claimed that the petitioners were wrong.

Form 6 has never been changed. The supplementary declaration form was not part of the statutory Form 6.

“The declaration is a document provided by orders of the SIR and is NOT part of Form 6, which is the statutory form for inclusion in the electoral roll,” the affidavit said.

The phrase “for inclusion in the electoral roll” does not fully explain the role of Form 6. This form is intended solely for use as a new elector. This aspect was also disputed by the petitioners. They argue that pre-existing voters who were struck out during the SIR exercise are forced to apply as new voters under threat of criminal consequences.

The EC said the additional statement was part of an online effort to help voters. They could enter the required details in a single document instead of doing multiple documents for verification like in Bihar SIR.

The ECI’s reasoning came even as the Supreme Court on October 12 clarified orally that it neither approved nor approved the controversial changes made to Form 6 in a May 27 judgment that was solely on the legality of the Bihar SIR pilot.

The oral note clearly recognized the additional declaration form as “new Form 6”.

“When the Bihar SIR matter was heard and decided, the new Form 6 was not there. We neither approved nor approved the new Form 6. But now we will examine it,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, said orally.

The remark came in response to a petition filed by Priya Mishra against the Union government challenging the changes made in Form 6 to register new voters during the SIR exercise conducted in several states.

Published – 27 Oct 2026 11:41 AM IST