Full Breakdown
Supreme Court Says It Has Neither Approved Nor Disapproved Modified Form 6 in Voter-Roll Revision
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Court Clarifies Position on Modified Form 6
On October 12, 2026, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court—Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana—stated that it has neither approved nor disapproved the revised Form 6 used by the Election Commission of India (ECI) for the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The bench noted that the May 27 judgment on the Bihar SIR pre-dated the new declaration attached to Form 6, so earlier observations cannot be read as a ruling on the modification.
Background & Context: SIR and the Role of Form 6
Form 6, prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules 1960, is the statutory application for inclusion of a name in an electoral roll. During the SIR—a nationwide clean-up exercise—the ECI added an additional declaration requiring applicants to indicate whether they, a parent or a grandparent appeared in a previous SIR roll. This clause was introduced to the online form in July 2026, after the Court’s May 27 decision.
Data & Statistics: Scale of Deletions in Delhi’s SIR
The petition filed by transparency activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri notes that, in the enumeration phase of the Delhi SIR, 47,56,722 electors—32.78 % of the pre-SIR roll—were excluded under the “Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate” (ASDD) category. For each excluded voter, the only avenue for reinstatement is filing Form 6, which now contains the contested declaration.
Official Statements & Responses
- “We will examine it now,” a court spokesperson said.
Criticism & Opposition
The petition argues that requiring previously enrolled voters to declare “first-time” inclusion is factually incorrect and could expose them to penalties under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act 1950. It also challenges the legality of the extra declaration, noting that amendments to the Registration of Electors Rules require parliamentary approval, which was not obtained.
Separately, Rahul Gandhi and ten other leaders of the INDIA bloc filed a petition on October 12, 2026 demanding full disclosure of ECI files related to the SIR and seeking an interim suspension of the exercise.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- ECI claim – A September 26 press release states that the Supreme Court “upheld” the additional declaration.
- Supreme Court denial – Multiple outlets (The Hindu, Lawbeat, NDTV, Bar and Bench, Economic Times, Indian Express, Hindustan Times) report that the Court “has neither approved nor disapproved” the revised form and has not yet adjudicated its validity.
The divergence leaves the legal status of the declaration unresolved.
What’s Next
The bench listed the matter for further hearing on October 27 alongside related petitions concerning the ECI and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. A separate petition challenging the functioning of the CEC is tentatively scheduled for November 6, and the Lok Prahi petition is set for November 16, 2026.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We have neither approved nor disapproved revised Form 6,” — Chief Justice Surya Kant
- “We have filed the petition in the Supreme Court” — Tejashwi Yadav, Samajwadi Party chief
- “All the opposition leaders have filed petitions in the Supreme Court...We are fighting to save democracy” — Tejashwi Yadav