Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had neither approved nor rejected the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) modified Form 6 declaration for new voter registration, stating that the revised form was not before it when it delivered its judgment in the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls case.
The BJP rejected the allegations. Party spokesperson Sambit Patra maintained that the Supreme Court had neither declared the form illegal nor rejected it. He also disputed the interpretation that the apex court had established any illegality in the modification. (with IANS inputs)
However, the modified declaration was introduced after the judgment. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. The revised declaration requires applicants seeking registration as new voters to disclose whether they or their parents were included in the previous SIR. Under the revised declaration, applicants seeking registration as new voters must state whether they or their parents were included in the previous SIR. The modifications have also prompted allegations about the ECI’s internal decision-making process.
The Supreme Court, therefore, had no occasion to examine its contents while deciding the Bihar SIR case. Mohana clarified while hearing a fresh petition raising concerns over the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and changes to Form 6. The clarification comes amid a political controversy over the revised Form 6 declaration, with questions being raised about how the changes were introduced and whether they were implemented despite objections from two Election Commissioners. The row intensified after the ECI issued a press release on September 26 suggesting that the Supreme Court had upheld the revised declaration in its May 2026 judgment on the Bihar SIR exercise. The earlier version of Form 6, used during SIR exercises in other states, did not contain this requirement. Two Election Commissioners reportedly objected to the changes, arguing that the declaration could not be modified without an amendment to the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, by the Central government.
CJI Surya Kant also cautioned against selectively quoting the court’s observations in media reports. Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi alleged that the form had been altered unilaterally and illegally to benefit the BJP. Responding to the submission, Justice Bagchi said the court had not adjudicated on the revised Form 6, pointing out that the modified declaration did not exist when the judgment in the Bihar SIR case was delivered. The revised Form 6 has also triggered a political confrontation between the BJP and the opposition.
“There is no adjudication on the new Form 6”, Justice Bagchi observed, clarifying that the court’s earlier oral remarks could not be interpreted as either approval or rejection of the revised declaration. “Please don’t pick words for news items”, he said.
The ECI, however, had claimed that the revised declaration had received the apex court’s approval. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Supreme Court had clarified on October 5 that it had not approved the modified Form 6.
