Election Commission tells Supreme Court SIR orders had unanimous approval

The Election Commission defended the electoral roll revision before the Supreme Court. It maintained that all orders were unanimous and voter enrolment safeguards remain available.Newdelhi,Oct 26, 2026 21:54 ISTThe Election Commission has told the Supreme Court that the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls was carried out in accordance with the law and that the three orders implementing it were unanimously approved by all three members of the Commission, news agency Press Trust of India reported on Monday.The Commission also rejected allegations that Form 6, used for voter registration, had been amended. Its response came after petitions alleged that several decisions, including changes to Form 6, were taken without the approval of the two election commissioners.In its counter-affidavit, the Election Commission said neither the law nor the prescribed Form 6 had been amended. The affidavit was approved unanimously by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the two election commissioners.According to PTI, the Commission said the SIR orders issued on June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026, were unanimously approved by its three members. It also said the Chief Election Commissioner could not be restrained from functioning on the basis of newspaper reports, which are not considered evidence under the law.On October 5, the Supreme Court said it would examine all decisions of the Election Commission and annul those found to be inconsistent with the law. It also issued notices to the Centre and the Commission. The petitions were filed after The Indian Express reported on September 25 that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections at least 14 times over the previous 10 months to decisions and orders concerning the SIR. According to the report, they said these were issued without their knowledge or recommendation.The claim led to protests by opposition parties and the Cockroach Janta Party, which demanded the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Kumar.The Election Commission said the SIR was undertaken as part of its constitutional mandate under Article 324 of the Constitution, along with the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the applicable rules.Rejecting the allegation that Form 6 had been amended through the SIR orders, the Commission said the declaration prescribed for the exercise was a separate document and not part of the statutory form for inclusion in the electoral roll.It said the declaration was intended to help verify applicants' eligibility and link their details with electoral rolls prepared during previous intensive revisions.The Commission said the declaration introduced for later phases of the SIR was a modified version of the earlier format. The change was intended to make the process easier by allowing applicants to provide details of themselves or their relatives listed in previous electoral rolls.According to the affidavit, applicants whose details could be linked with earlier electoral rolls could submit the declaration with Form 6 without additional documents. Those unable to provide such details, or whose records could not be linked, would have to submit the prescribed supporting documents.The Commission also cited the Supreme Court's May 27, 2026, judgment in the Association for Democratic Reforms versus Election Commission of India case. It said the judgment recognised the Commission's authority to prescribe a documentation framework for revising electoral rolls.The affidavit said the Commission had decided to assist voters who could not be linked to previous electoral rolls or whose records contained discrepancies. Booth-level officers would visit their homes to collect documents, which would then be uploaded for consideration by electoral registration officers.The Commission said eligible people could still apply for enrolment after the SIR was completed and that the regular process of updating electoral rolls would continue under the applicable rules.The Election Commission urged the Supreme Court to reject the petitioners' claims as misconceived, maintaining that the SIR orders were unanimously approved, Form 6 remained unchanged and eligible voters would continue to have an opportunity to enrol.- Ends