35 mins ago
Form 6 Dispute Escalates as Congress Presses Attack on CEC
A disagreement has grown over changes to a voter registration form called Form 6.
The Supreme Court said it had not approved a modified version and wants to find out who made the change.
The court did not suspend Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar right away and said it must hear from the people and institutions involved first.
Congress leaders say the change was improper and are planning protests.
The Election Commission says the allegations are misleading.
It says the order for the voter-list revision in Bihar was approved by the Commission and upheld by the court.
A petition also points to alleged objections by two other election commissioners about how some decisions were made.
The Election Commission says questions raised during drafting are part of its usual process.
The Aam Aadmi Party said it would not take part in the planned INDIA bloc march.
The Supreme Court said it had not approved a modified version of Form 6 and said it wanted authenticated information about who changed it.
The court declined to suspend Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar immediately, issued notices to respondents and said they must first be heard.
Rahul Gandhi accused Kumar of changing Form 6 illegally; the Election Commission called the allegations misleading and said the Bihar SIR order had been upheld.
Congress announced protests, including an INDIA bloc MPs’ march and a nationwide campaign, while the Aam Aadmi Party said it would not join the march.
The petition cites alleged objections by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi over SIR decisions, Form 6 and electoral-roll systems; the ECI says draft-stage queries are part of normal administration.
- Who
- The Congress, Rahul Gandhi, the Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and petitioners before the Supreme Court.
- What
- A dispute over a modified Form 6, the conduct of the Special Intensive Revision, and allegations about how Election Commission decisions were made.
- Where
- New Delhi, with Congress also announcing a nationwide campaign and district-level actions.
- When
- The court hearing and political reactions took place on Monday; an INDIA bloc march was planned for Tuesday, October 6, and Congress announced a campaign starting October 10.
- Why
- Opposition leaders allege Form 6 was changed improperly and that SIR-related decisions were taken unilaterally; the ECI disputes the allegations.
Congress and petitioners
Election Commission and BJP
Form 6 changes
Congress and petitioners
Rahul Gandhi alleged that Gyanesh Kumar changed Form 6 illegally and unilaterally; the petition says the SIR-linked disclosure should not have been added without a rule change.
Election Commission and BJP
The ECI called the allegations misleading and said the relevant declaration was upheld by the Supreme Court. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said the court had not declared Form 6 illegal and would examine the claimed modification.
How Commission decisions were made
Congress and petitioners
The petition relies on alleged objections by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, arguing that decisions were made without the collective process required by law.
Election Commission and BJP
The ECI said operational queries, inputs and suggestions during the draft stage are part of standard administrative and decision-making processes, and rejected the claim that they showed institutional dissent over final decisions.
Suspending the CEC
Congress and petitioners
A petitioner’s lawyer sought immediate suspension of Gyanesh Kumar, arguing that alleged unilateral decisions threatened electoral democracy.
Election Commission and BJP
The Supreme Court declined to grant an immediate ex-parte suspension, said the respondents should first be heard, and questioned whether suspending the CEC could stall the poll panel’s work.
Key facts
- Disputed form
- Form 6, used to enrol new voters in electoral rolls.
- Form 6 issue
- The online form reportedly adds a declaration asking whether applicants or their parents were mapped in the previous SIR.
- Supreme Court response
- The court said it had not approved a modified Form 6 and sought authenticated information about who changed it.
- Interim relief
- The court refused an ex-parte order to suspend the CEC and issued notices to the respondents.
- Planned march
- INDIA bloc MPs planned to march from Parliament House to the ECI office at 11 a.m. on October 6.
- Congress campaign
- Congress announced a nationwide “Vote Bachao, Desh Bachao” campaign beginning October 10.
- ECI position
- The ECI called Rahul Gandhi’s allegations misleading and said the Bihar SIR order had unanimous Commission approval and was upheld by the Supreme Court.
- Reported objections
- The petition cites at least 14 alleged objections by two Election Commissioners concerning SIR-related decisions and electoral matters.
Quotes
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant
Chief Justice of India, speaking during the hearing.
“It is now established beyond doubt that Gyanesh Kumar changed Form 6 illegally and unilaterally. This is just one more proof of him abusing his position to help the BJP. He and everyone else involved in this criminal assault on our democracy will be held accountable.”
republicworld.com
“Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let's be clear. When the record is produced, we would like to see who has modified.”
republicworld.com
Sources
Related news
Rahul Gandhi Accuses Election Chief of Illegally Changing Form 6
Congress Challenges Election Commission’s SIR and Form 6 Defence
Plea Seeks Prosecution of CEC Gyanesh Kumar Over ECI Decisions
Congress Holds Nationwide Protests, Demands CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s Removal
Rahul Gandhi Says Gyanesh Kumar Changed Form 6 Illegally
Congress Demands SIR Suspension and CEC Gyanesh Kumar’s Resignation
Andhra Congress to Contest Every Local Body Election Seat
Supreme Court Reviews Election Commission Decisions Made Without Unanimity
NSUI Stages ‘Living Dead’ Protest, Demands Election Chief’s Arrest
BJP Says Supreme Court Notices Show Institutions Work Independently
