Delhi. Amidst the ongoing controversy regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list, the Supreme Court on Monday made an important comment regarding the changes made in 'Form-6'. The Supreme Court on Monday said it has not approved any changes in 'Form 6' being used by the Election Commission during Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists in different states. 'Form 6' is an application through which an eligible person seeks inclusion of his/her name in the electoral roll.
Let the records come, then we will see who made the changes
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana said, “We have not approved any changes in 'Form 6'. This thing should be clear. When the records are produced, we would like to see who has made the changes in it.
The bench was hearing a PIL which was filed following a recent news by 'Indian Express'. The report claimed that two of the three election commissioners had objected to the decisions related to the SIR, including the changes made in 'Form 6' regarding the genealogy of the applicant and linking him to the previous SIR.
Court's comments regarding the demands of the petition
The bench told senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy, appearing for petitioner Shailendra Mani Tripathi, that the demands made in his PIL seemed confused. Tripathi had challenged the decisions, guidelines and changes in software made by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar allegedly without the consent of his two colleagues.
During the hearing on Tripathi's PIL, Guruswamy said there was no infirmity in the petitioner's PIL and expressed concern over the changes made in 'Form 6'.
Bihar SIR decision also mentioned
The Election Commission had issued a press statement on September 26 saying that the Supreme Court had upheld the declaration of 'Form 6' in its May 2026 judgment related to SIR in Bihar. However, in Monday's hearing, the Supreme Court clarified its stand and said that it has not approved any changes in Form-6.
Case added to second petition
The bench issued notice on Tripathi's plea and clubbed the case with another PIL filed by Patna resident Rakesh Kumar Singh on the same issue. Tripathi's plea, filed through advocate Chand Qureshi, alleged that the actions of the Chief Election Commissioner violate the legal requirement of collective decision making.
The petition also sought initiation of criminal proceedings against the Chief Election Commissioner and other officials for breach of official duty. Tripathi cited the provisions of the 'Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023', especially Section 18.