SC plea flags legal trap for deleted voters, says Form 6 forces false declaration

For any person on the ASDD list, the only mechanism for filing a claim to have their name restored to the voter list is through Form 6.
Supreme Court of India.
Supreme Court of India.(Photo | ANI, FILE)
Updated on: 
2 min read

NEW DELHI: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court regarding the illegalities arising from requiring voters whose names have been deleted pursuant to the SIR exercise to fill Form 6 to seek the re-inclusion of their names on the voter list. Form 6 requires every applicant to affirm that they are “applying for inclusion in Electoral Roll for the first time”.

The IA petition has been filed by transparency activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, whose petition challenging the procedures regarding logical discrepancies in the Delhi SIR is also pending before the top court. The petition has been filed through advocates Prashant Bhushan and Neha Rathi.

The matter will be mentioned by Bhushan in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

The plea said that during the enumeration phase of the SIR in Delhi, 47,56,722 electors (32.78% of the voters who existed prior to the start of the SIR) were excluded from the Draft Electoral Roll under the category of ASDD (Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate). For any person on the ASDD list, the only mechanism for filing a claim to have their name restored to the voter list is through Form 6.

The plea stated that this creates a fundamental anomaly, as all these people were previously enrolled on the voter list but are now required to submit Form 6 and make a declaration that they are seeking inclusion in the electoral roll for the first time, which is factually incorrect and wholly inapplicable to their circumstances.

Supreme Court of India.
No change in Form 6, Rahul Gandhi’s claim over it misleading: ECI

Further, such persons also become liable to face punishment for making a false declaration under Section 31 of the RP Act, 1950, which provides for imprisonment for a term that may extend to one year, or a fine, or both.

The petition also points out that the additional Declaration Form required to be submitted along with Forms 6 and 8, as prescribed through the SIR guidelines, is without the force of law and should be struck down. Form 6 is prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which have been framed under Section 28 of the RPA, 1950.

The plea stated that Section 28(1) empowers the Central Government, after consultation with the Election Commission, to make rules for carrying out the purposes of the Act by notification in the Official Gazette, while Section 28(3) requires such rules to be laid before both Houses of Parliament and permits Parliament to modify or annul them.

However, no such procedure was followed for this additional declaration form. The additional Declaration Form, which was published in the SIR guidelines issued in June 2026, was subsequently modified in the SIR guidelines issued in October 2025 and the guidelines issued in May 2026 (which are applicable to Delhi).

The petition also points out that the subsequent clarification by the ECI that the additional Declaration Form will not be required during the non-SIR period creates a situation in which different mechanisms exist for the same purpose, which is legally untenable.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com