Karnataka HC Stays FIR Over 778 Form 7 Applications, Questions 50-Application Cap

The Karnataka High Court has granted an interim stay on an FIR against two persons accused of submitting 778 Form 7 applications seeking the deletion of names from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), while questioning the legal basis for treating submissions exceeding 50 applications as an offence.

A single-judge bench of Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde passed the interim order on Friday while hearing petitions filed by G S Vasanthalakshmi and R Deepak Singh, residents of Guttahalli, seeking the quashing of the FIR registered against them over allegations of submitting applications containing false information.

Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate M Arun Shyam submitted that the two were Booth Level Agents (BLAs) who had sought the removal of ineligible names from the electoral rolls. He argued that election officials were responsible for examining the applications, verifying the information provided and taking appropriate decisions.

Opposing the petitions, Additional Public Prosecutor Anoop Kumar told the court that an individual could submit a maximum of 50 applications. He alleged that the petitioners had attempted to deliberately secure the deletion of voters' names from the electoral rolls.

The bench questioned the prosecution's position, asking whether election officials were not required to verify the applications and examine any false information before deciding on them. It also sought to know whether notices would be served on the voters concerned before their names were deleted from the electoral rolls.

The court's questions centred on the role of election authorities in scrutinising Form 7 applications and the safeguards available to voters during the revision process. Form 7 is used to seek the deletion of a name from the electoral roll on specified grounds, including death, shifting or alleged duplicate registration. Such applications are subject to scrutiny by the election authorities before a decision is taken.

The interim stay provides temporary relief to the petitioners while their challenge to the FIR is considered. The order does not amount to a final decision on the allegations or the validity of the FIR. The case comes amid political disputes and allegations over the use of Form 7 applications during the ongoing electoral roll revision in Karnataka.