EC Defends SIR Legality, Says Online Form 6 Changes Were Only a Display Issue

The Election Commission on Monday defended its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls before the Supreme Court, asserting that the exercise was legally authorised and unanimously approved by all three commissioners.

In a 248-page counter-affidavit, the poll panel sought dismissal of petitions challenging the decisions of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the conduct of the revision exercise, describing the allegations as misconceived and based on a newspaper report.

The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, is scheduled to hear the petitions on Tuesday. Rejecting allegations that Form 6, used by eligible citizens to seek inclusion in electoral rolls, had been amended, the EC said the declaration accompanying it was a separate document introduced under SIR orders.

However, it acknowledged that integrating the declaration into the online Form 6 page could create the impression that the statutory form had been changed. The arrangement was introduced to allow applicants to complete the process using a single OTP and e-signature. Following a review on October 21, online applications will also be divided into two parts, like physical forms.

The Commission maintained that its SIR orders of June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026, were approved unanimously under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 18 of the 2023 Act governing election commissioners.

Addressing concerns over the process, the EC said booth-level officers (BLOs) would visit the homes of people issued SIR notices to collect documents, reducing the need for personal hearings. Hearings would be held only in exceptional cases, preferably online.

On the ECINet portal, the Commission said electoral roll entries could be changed only on orders of the electoral registration officer. A committee involving experts from IIT Bombay and IISc Bengaluru was constituted on October 14 to examine the portal's compliance with the law.

The EC also rejected challenges to electronic voting machines and argued that the plea seeking to restrain the CEC from functioning was legally untenable. The petitions followed a newspaper report alleging that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had repeatedly raised objections to SIR-related decisions.