VOTERS CANNOT BE ERASED BY BUREAUCRATIC DEADLINES: SUPREME COURT QUESTIONS FORM 6 REQUIREMENT

October 29, 2026

NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 29, 2026: The Supreme Court has questioned the Election Commission’s decision to require existing voters excluded from Delhi’s draft electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) to submit Form 6 applications, which are intended for new voter registration.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, expressed concern over the treatment of approximately 47 lakh voters whose names were omitted from the draft rolls out of an electorate of around 1.45 crore. The petition, filed by social activist Anjali Bhardwaj, challenges aspects of the revision process.

The petitioners argued that around 43 lakh affected voters had been classified as shifted, absent, dead or duplicate. They contended that requiring previously registered voters to apply as new voters could force them to make declarations inconsistent with their existing electoral status.

The court emphasised that the statutory provisions governing voter registration and corrections could not be altered through administrative orders. It directed the Election Commission to permit affected voters to submit enumeration forms and Form 8, which accommodates changes of address and corrections to electoral entries, instead of compelling them to use Form 6.

The bench further stressed that the Election Commission must proactively contact affected citizens, including migrant workers, hawkers and daily-wage earners, and provide them with the appropriate forms. It also called for an extension of the submission deadline, observing that failure to complete the enumeration process within the prescribed period should not permanently deprive eligible citizens of their right to vote.

The Election Commission’s representative assured the court that the concerns would be discussed with officials and that a possible new category could be considered to facilitate the updating of voters’ residential details.

The Supreme Court scheduled the matter for further hearing after two weeks.