New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had not adjudicated on the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) modified Form 6 declaration for new voter registration, observing that the revised form was not before it when it decided the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls case.
A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana made the clarification while hearing a fresh petition raising concerns over the functioning of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and the changes to Form 6, which requires applicants seeking registration as new voters to disclose whether they or their parents were mapped in the previous SIR.
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Supreme Court had clarified on October 5 that the modified Form 6 had not been approved by it, while the ECI had claimed that the revised declaration had received the top court’s approval.
Responding to the submission, Justice Bagchi said the Supreme Court had not adjudicated on the new Form 6, adding that the revised form was not in existence when the judgment in the Bihar SIR case was delivered.
“There is no adjudication on the new Form 6,” he observed, clarifying that the apex court’s earlier oral remarks could not be construed as either approving or disapproving the modified declaration.
CJI Surya Kant cautioned against selectively interpreting the top court’s observations for media reports, saying: “Please don’t pick words for news items.”
The clarification comes amid a political row over the modified Form 6 declaration, with questions being raised about the circumstances in which the changes were introduced and whether they were implemented despite objections from two Election Commissioners.
The controversy intensified after the ECI issued a press release on September 26 suggesting that the Supreme Court had upheld the revised declaration in its May 2026 judgment concerning the Bihar SIR exercise.
However, the modified declaration was introduced after the judgment, and the Supreme Court had no occasion to examine its contents while deciding the Bihar SIR matter.
Under the revised declaration, applicants seeking registration as new voters are required to state whether they or their parents were included in the previous SIR.
The earlier version of Form 6 used during the SIR exercise in other states did not contain this requirement.
The changes have also triggered allegations concerning the decision-making process within the ECI, with objections reportedly raised by two Election Commissioners on the ground that the declaration could not be modified without an amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, by the Central government.
The controversy over the revised Form 6 also led to a political exchange, with Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi alleging that it had been altered unilaterally and illegally to benefit the BJP. The BJP rejected the allegations, with party spokesperson Sambit Patra maintaining that the Supreme Court had neither declared the form illegal nor rejected it. He also disputed the interpretation that the apex court had established any illegality in the modification.
(IANS)
