New Delhi: Former Union Law Minister Ashwani Kumar on Tuesday said that the Supreme Court must decide whether the Election Commission of India (ECI) took its decisions unanimously, following the poll body’s submission of an affidavit clarifying its decision-making process before the apex court.
Kumar’s remarks came after the ECI informed the Supreme Court that there had been no change to Form 6, the statutory document prescribed for the inclusion of names in electoral rolls. The poll panel rejected allegations that it had amended the form through its orders issued for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.
In a counter-affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the ECI described as misleading the allegation that it had amended Form 6 through its SIR orders dated June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026. The poll body clarified that the declaration required under the SIR orders is a separate document and does not constitute a part of Form 6, which can be amended only by the Central Government.
Speaking to IANS, Ashwani Kumar said the affidavit filed by the Election Commission was significant because the central issue behind the ongoing agitation concerned allegations that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar had taken decisions independently rather than in consultation with the other Election Commissioners.
“The Election Commission’s affidavit is very important because the main issue over which the agitation is taking place is that the Chief Election Commissioner used to take decisions on his own and not in consultation with others. Regarding this, the affidavit filed in the Supreme Court now clearly states that all decisions were ultimately taken unanimously,” Kumar said.
He said the Supreme Court would now have to examine the implications of the ECI’s submission that its decisions were unanimous, particularly in light of the objections reportedly raised by the two Election Commissioners at an earlier stage.
“The Supreme Court now has to decide whether, if the decisions were unanimous, it should be understood that the objections raised by both Election Commissioners at one stage were withdrawn by them or were not considered valid. The Supreme Court is yet to decide this,” he said.
Kumar also addressed the controversy surrounding Form 6 and the additional information sought from applicants during the SIR exercise. He said the ECI’s affidavit maintained that no changes had been made to the prescribed statutory form, while acknowledging that a separate declaration form had been introduced to seek additional information.
“As far as Form 6 is concerned, the Election Commission’s affidavit states that, according to the report, no changes were made. However, it is also true that additional information was sought in a declaration form by the CEC or an Election Commissioner, apart from Form 6. The Supreme Court will now have to decide whether the additional information sought actually changes Form 6 in the true sense,” Kumar added.
(IANS)
