Archive · 6 Oct 2026
Supreme Court Says It Did Not Approve Form 6 Changes
Form 6 is used by people who want to join the voter list.
An online version added questions about whether applicants or their close relatives were on an older voter list.
Some people and two Election Commissioners said the form should not have been changed without formally changing the rules.
The Election Commission said the Supreme Court had upheld the added declaration.
Chief Justice Surya Kant said the court had not approved the modified form.
The court plans to look at the Election Commission’s records to find out whether the form was changed and who did it.
The Election Commission said rules-based forms would be used outside special voter-list reviews.
The court has also said the Election Commission can set documentation requirements for a special review, but those requirements must not be arbitrary.
Chief Justice Surya Kant said the Supreme Court had not approved the modified Form 6.
The court said it would inspect Election Commission records to determine whether the form was changed and by whom.
The ECINET version added a declaration asking whether applicants or their parents or grandparents appeared on an earlier SIR electoral roll.
Two Election Commissioners objected to the change, which they said required an amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
The Election Commission said the Supreme Court had upheld the declaration and that rules-based forms would be used during non-SIR periods.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, the Election Commission of India, and petitioners challenging the modified Form 6.
- What
- The court said it had not approved the modified form and would inspect ECI records to establish whether it was changed and by whom.
- When
- Monday, October 5; the articles do not specify the year.
- Where
- India; the disputed declaration appeared on the ECI’s ECINET online portal.
- Why
- Petitioners challenged an added SIR-related declaration, arguing the form was changed without the required amendment to the rules.
Court and petitioners
Election Commission position
Whether the Supreme Court approved the declaration
Court and petitioners
Chief Justice Surya Kant said the modified Form 6 had not been approved by the Supreme Court, which plans to examine ECI records.
Election Commission position
The Election Commission said the Supreme Court had upheld the SIR declaration; the articles note that the court’s May order does not appear to expressly say so.
Whether the online change was authorised
Court and petitioners
Petitioners and two Election Commissioners argued that Form 6 could not be changed without amending the rules; Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu called the change unauthorised and illegal.
Election Commission position
The Election Commission said forms prescribed by the rules would be used outside SIR periods. The Supreme Court’s May ruling also said the ECI had residual powers to set documentation requirements for a special revision, provided they were not arbitrary.
- Form 6
- A statutory form used by people applying to enrol as voters, including newly eligible voters and deleted voters applying afresh.
- Rules governing the form
- Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
- Added declaration
- The online form asked whether the applicant, a parent, or a grandparent appeared on the electoral roll from the previous Special Intensive Revision.
- Court’s next step
- The Supreme Court said it would examine Election Commission records to determine whether the form was changed and who changed it.
- Election Commissioners’ objections
- The Indian Express reported that two Election Commissioners objected on record 14 times in 10 months to decisions and steps taken by the Commission.
- ECI statement
- On September 26, the ECI said the original rules-based forms would be used for non-SIR periods; it also said the SIR declaration had been upheld by the Supreme Court.
- Amendment process
- The articles say a change to Form 6 would require amendment of the rules and a Gazette notification by the central government.
