Archive · 23 Sep 2026
Election Commissioners Raised 14 Objections to SIR Process
Three election commissioners were involved in reviewing the SIR process.
Two of them raised objections 14 times during a 10-month period.
They were especially concerned about a change to Form 6.
The changed form asked new applicants about their own or relatives’ names in an earlier SIR voter roll.
The commissioners warned that the rules needed to be changed before this could happen.
Even so, the change was put into effect.
Sandhu and Joshi called it unauthorised and illegal in official records.
The report does not describe a response defending the change.
Two of three election commissioners objected to the SIR process 14 times over 10 months.
The dissenting commissioners objected specifically to changes made to Form 6.
The altered form required new applicants to declare whether they or relatives appeared in the previous SIR roll.
The change was implemented despite warnings that relevant rules needed to be amended first.
Sandhu and Joshi described the change as “unauthorised and illegal” in official records.
- Who
- Two of three election commissioners, including Sandhu and Joshi, objected to the process.
- What
- They objected 14 times to the SIR process, especially an alteration to Form 6.
- When
- The objections were made over 10 months; the controversy is ongoing in the report.
- Where
- Not specified in the article.
- Why
- They said the Form 6 change required an amendment to the relevant rules and was unauthorised and illegal.
Dissenting Commissioners
Process Implementation
Legality of the Form 6 change
Dissenting Commissioners
Sandhu and Joshi said the alteration was “unauthorised and illegal” and warned that the relevant rules had to be amended first.
Process Implementation
The altered Form 6 was implemented despite those objections; the report does not provide a stated defense or justification from supporters of the change.
Frequency of objections
Dissenting Commissioners
Two commissioners objected to the SIR process 14 times over 10 months.
Process Implementation
The process continued despite the repeated objections, according to the report.
- Objections
- 14 objections
- Objecting commissioners
- Two of three election commissioners
- Time period
- 10 months
- Disputed document
- Form 6
- New requirement
- Applicants had to declare whether they or relatives appeared in the previous SIR roll.
- Commissioners’ description
- “Unauthorised and illegal”
- Rule-related concern
- The change was made without amending the relevant rules, according to the objections.