Supreme Court questions EC over use of Form 6 to restore names in Delhi SIR
The court questioned the use of Form 6 for previously registered voters and asked the poll panel to simplify re-inclusion procedures and consider removing cut-off dates
 "Supreme Court")
The Supreme Court has called for simpler voter enrolment procedures to help eligible electors secure their place on electoral rolls. (File)
Listen to This Article
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) why previously registered voters must apply afresh using Form 6, which is meant for first-time enrolment, and suggested measures to make it easier for eligible electors to restore their names, LiveLaw reported.
The dispute concerns voters whose names were excluded from Delhi’s draft electoral roll after they did not submit enumeration forms during the SIR exercise.
The draft electoral roll published on August 31 excluded around 4.76 million electors, raising concerns about whether eligible voters could be left out because they missed the enumeration process.
Petitioners represented by advocate Prashant Bhushan, argued that some voters had been classified as absent or permanently shifted even though they might have missed the enumeration process for other reasons.
Form 6 requires applicants to declare that they are seeking inclusion in the electoral roll for the first time. The petitioners argued that this requirement is inappropriate for people who were already registered voters.
Also Read
 "Dipesh Shah, Executive Director, IFSCA V. Balasubramaniam, MD & CEO, NSE International Exchange Vijay Krishnamurthy, MD & CEO, India INX Suresh Swamy, Partner, Price Waterhouse & Co LLP")
 "BFSI summit- experts")
 "Budget 2026, container manufacturing scheme, shipping sector, inland waterways, coastal shipping, Atmanirbharta, IFSC tax reforms")
 "stubble burning")
 "Left to right: Business Standard's Pravin Palande, Bajaj Alts Group President – Investments and MD & CEO Lakshmi Iyer, 3P Investment Managers Founder & CIO Prashant Jain, PPFAS Asset Management CIO – Equity & Director Rajeev Thakkar.")
The Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, questioned why such electors could not be allowed to submit their enumeration forms or use Form 8, which is used to update electoral details, including a change of address.
Simplifying voter enrolment
The court suggested that the ECI introduce a separate category for voters who could not respond because enumeration forms were not served to them or because they were temporarily away.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned whether voters should lose their place on the electoral roll simply because they could not complete the enumeration process.
The Bench also asked the ECI to consider reaching out to affected voters instead of placing the entire burden on them to approach election officials.
Its suggestions included:
- Allowing enumeration forms: Previously registered voters who missed the exercise could be given another opportunity to submit their forms
- Enabling Form 8 applications: Voters who have shifted addresses could be allowed to update their details through the appropriate procedure
- Publishing the list of excluded voters: Authorities could identify affected electors and ask them to contact their nearest Booth Level Officer (BLO)
- Extending deadlines: The ECI was asked to consider giving voters more time to complete the process
The Chief Justice also suggested that the ECI clarify that Form 6 is intended for first-time voters, while those previously included in the 2026 electoral roll should have an appropriate route to seek restoration.
The Bench also clarified that it had not judicially examined the “logical discrepancy” criterion in the Bihar SIR case. Referring to West Bengal, the judges said the criterion had been allowed to continue as an interim measure, but its constitutionality had not been examined.
Next steps for the ECI
The ECI told the court that it would discuss the suggestions and consider providing an alternative form for affected voters. The Commission also argued that Form 6 was being used because the names of these electors were absent from the draft roll.
The court, however, stressed that the procedure should distinguish between genuinely new voters and those who were previously registered but could not complete the enumeration exercise.
Delhi’s deadline for filing claims and objections under the SIR was October 30, while the deadline for disposing of notices, claims and objections was November 30.
The Supreme Court said the matter would be taken up again after two weeks, giving the ECI time to consider the proposed changes.
More From This Section
 "Ashwini Vaishnav")
 "Cyclone, Cyclone Arnab")
 "Hardeep Singh Puri, Union petroleum minister")
 "Crowds, Delhi liquor shops")
 "Haier Appliances India, Haier")
Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel
First Published: Oct 28 2026 | 5:33 PM IST