Bombay HC questions ECI over deletion of voter names during SIR; points to rule on roll

The Bench told the ECI that the Supreme Court has held that the Commission has an obligation to ensure that citizens of India are included in the voter list. | Photo Credit: The Hindu The Bombay High Court at Goa questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) over the deletion of names during Special Intensive Revision (SIR). It said the electoral roll currently in force continues to remain valid until the draft roll is finalised under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.A Division Bench comprising Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar was hearing a petition filed by the Salgaonkar family, which said its names were dropped from the draft electoral roll despite having submitted Form 8 to change their address.The Bench told the ECI that the Supreme Court has held that the Commission has an obligation to ensure that citizens of India are included in the voter list.“Read the judgment. It says ECI has an obligation to ensure that citizens of India are on the list... If citizens are excluded what will we do with your SIR? If citizens are being removed from the list then what is the purpose of this SIR process?,” the Bench said.The Court referred to Rule 12, which provides for objections, and asked why a citizen could not submit Form 8 instead of an enumeration form.ECI counsel Gaurish Agni argued that voters must submit enumeration forms to get their names on the draft voter list. The ECI maintained that under the SIR guidelines, voters seeking an address change must submit an enumeration form along with Form 8. If a voter fails to submit the enumeration form, they must file Form 6 instead, the ECI said.The Bench, however, noted that the enumeration form contains a declaration that the voter continues to reside at the address mentioned in the electoral roll currently in force. It said the ECI cannot compel a citizen to sign a declaration that conflicts with fact.If a voter has changed residence, the ECI cannot ask the voter to submit the enumeration form, the Bench said.“If a voter comes to you with Form 8, saying he has changed his address, you just cannot tell that person that your name isn’t included in the draft roll and now you will have to fill in Form 6,” Justice Menezes observed.“If someone has changed residence, can you compel the person to make a declaration that conflicts with fact by submitting that enumeration form? Why can’t that person simply give a Form 8 since his name is already there on the list now in force if he just wants to get his address changed?,” he asked.The Bench said a person who no longer lives at an address cannot be compelled to sign an enumeration form declaring that they continue reside there. It also asked how someone could seek inclusion in the electoral roll if they do not live in that constituency or ward.The Bench also objected to the ECI dropping names during the SIR process for not submitting an enumeration form. It said the SIR process cannot be used to disregard the electoral roll currently in force.“Your argument now is that since SIR is in process, we shouldn’t look at the roll now in force and only focus on the draft roll... We just cannot ignore the list now in force,” the Bench remarked.The Bench noted that the enumeration form did not exist in the history of the country. These observations were made while hearing the petition. Published - October 07, 2026 02:57 pm IST