DELETED ON PAPER, REINSTATED THROUGH A FRESH CLAIM: ELECTION COMMISSION DEFENDS FORM 6 REQUIREMENT AMID SUPREME COURT SCRUTINY
November 4, 2026
NEW DELHI: The Election Commission of India (ECI) has defended its decision to require voters whose names have been deleted from draft electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) to submit Form 6 for fresh inclusion, maintaining that the procedure is legally valid even if the applicants had been registered voters previously.
In a circular issued to chief electoral officers on Tuesday, the poll panel addressed concerns that voters were reluctant to submit Form 6 because the application contains a declaration stating that their names are being included in the electoral roll for the first time. Some deleted voters feared that signing the declaration despite having been registered earlier could amount to making a false statement.
The Commission clarified that the declaration has been part of Form 6 since August 1, 2022, and that voters whose names do not appear in the draft electoral roll must seek fresh inclusion, irrespective of whether they had been enrolled previously. It maintained that submitting Form 6 in such circumstances does not, by itself, constitute a false declaration merely because the applicant was registered earlier.
To support its position, the ECI cited a recent Delhi High Court order which held that apprehensions regarding a false declaration were misplaced. The Commission also referred to Rule 13(1) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which requires every claim for inclusion in the electoral roll to be submitted through Form 6. Rule 25(2), concerning intensive revision of electoral rolls, provides for the preparation of the revised roll afresh, applying the relevant rules governing the initial preparation of electoral rolls.
The Commission had earlier argued before the Delhi High Court that these provisions permitted the use of Form 6 for people who could not complete their enumeration forms, including those who had shifted residence.
However, the requirement has attracted criticism amid continuing judicial scrutiny of the SIR process. Last week, the Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission over requiring an estimated 47 lakh voters deleted from Delhi's electoral rolls to submit Form 6 applications.
The Maharashtra Chief Electoral Officer had also suggested that the Commission approach the Union law ministry to amend Form 6 and remove the first-time inclusion declaration, which has caused confusion among voters seeking reinstatement. Former Chief Election Commissioner S.Y. Quraishi has similarly questioned the rationale and legality of the practice.
Petitioners Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri wrote to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar on Tuesday, urging the Commission to establish a simplified mechanism in accordance with the Supreme Court's oral directions. They argued that voters deleted because they had shifted residence should be permitted to submit Form 8 and called for the acceptance of Form 8 applications or enumeration forms from people placed on the ASDD (Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate) list without compelling them to file Form 6.
Congress MP and party communications chief Jairam Ramesh also criticised the clarification, arguing that the Commission was attempting to justify a process that first removes voters from the rolls and subsequently requires them to apply for inclusion as new electors. He described the explanation as an attempt to defend what he considers a flawed electoral revision exercise and demanded that the SIR be stopped.
The dispute has consequently developed into a wider debate over the legal procedure for restoring deleted names, the responsibilities of the Election Commission and the protection of voting rights during intensive electoral roll revision.
