The Election Commission of India (ECI) has clarified to the Delhi High Court that voters whose names were removed from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in the national capital can resolve their grievances by filing Form 6. The commission's stance came in response to a petition filed by two individuals seeking the restoration of their names to the voter list.
The petitioners had approached the court to contest the ECI's standard procedure for electors who failed to complete the enumeration process. They argued that because they had relocated, they were unable to submit the required forms during the revision period, leading to their names being struck off the rolls. The duo had requested that the court direct the election authorities to restore their entries or permit them to use Form 8 for correction and transposition, rather than necessitating a fresh application through Form 6.
During the proceedings, the petitioners expressed apprehension that submitting Form 6—which is typically used for the fresh inclusion of names—could potentially expose them to legal risks. They feared that because the form requires an applicant to declare they are registering for the first time, they could be accused of furnishing a false declaration if they utilized it to restore a previously held registration.
The standing counsel representing the Election Commission stated that the process for redressal is clearly laid out under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The counsel assured the court that the electoral registration officer would extend necessary assistance to applicants. However, the ECI noted that the petitioners had previously declined to use the prescribed channel, opting instead to seek judicial intervention.
A bench comprising Justices Dinesh Mehta and Aditi Choudhary heard the arguments and determined that the concerns raised by the petitioners were unfounded. The court observed that the suggestion to use Form 6 originated from the ECI’s standing counsel, acting on instructions from the electoral registration officer. Consequently, the bench concluded that the fear of facing penal consequences for a false declaration was “misplaced” in this context.
In its order, the court decided to close the writ proceedings, noting that the statutory framework provided by the commission was sufficient to handle the grievance. The judges stated, “The petitioners, if so desire, may fill Form 6, which shall be processed in accordance with law.” This ruling provides a clear path for the affected voters to re-establish their voting rights.
Form 6 serves as the official application for new voters seeking to join the electoral roll. Applicants must provide personal details and affirm that their registration request is for the first time. The ECI maintains that the integrity of the electoral roll is upheld through these procedures, and while providing false information can carry legal penalties, utilizing the form as guided by the electoral registration officer to correct administrative omissions is a legitimate exercise of the registration process.
The resolution of this case underscores the importance of adherence to defined administrative protocols during election preparation. For voters in similar situations, the guidance from the ECI suggests that the standard application process remains the primary mechanism for ensuring electoral participation. With the court proceedings concluded, the path is now open for the petitioners to proceed with their applications for re-inclusion in the electoral rolls.
Comments