- Court clarified Form 6 not adjudicated during Bihar SIR.
The Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had neither approved nor rejected the revised Form 6 used for voter registration, stating that the issue was not adjudicated during hearings on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the matter had not been considered when the court heard the Bihar SIR case. The clarification came as the court heard a petition challenging changes to the form, with similar pleas scheduled to be heard on 27 October.
No Ruling On Form 6
The bench, comprising the CJI and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, was hearing a petition concerning the SIR exercise.
Counsel for the petitioner told the court that the Election Commission had claimed the revised Form 6 was approved by the Supreme Court.
Responding to the submission, Justice Bagchi said there had been no adjudication on the new form. He explained that the revised Form 6 was not part of the issues before the court when it considered the Bihar SIR matter.
“What the Chief Justice said was that when the Bihar SIR matter was heard by us, the new Form 6 was not there,” Justice Bagchi observed, making it clear that the court’s earlier proceedings could not be interpreted as either approval or rejection of the revised form.
The bench said the petition would be heard alongside other pending cases concerning the SIR exercise on October 27.
EC Press Release Under Scrutiny
On October 5, the Supreme Court had clarified during a separate hearing that it had not approved modifications to Form 6.
The issue arose after the Election Commission issued a press release on September 26 suggesting that the apex court had upheld the Form 6 declaration in its May 2026 judgment concerning the Bihar SIR.
Form 6 is the application used by eligible individuals to seek inclusion in electoral rolls.
What The Plea Alleges
The petition refers to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, particularly Section 18, which governs decision-making within the Election Commission and provides that the majority view prevails in cases of disagreement.
A key contention concerns the addition of requirements relating to ancestral details and links with previous SIR exercises.
The petitioner alleges these requirements were introduced through the Election Commission’s software without the statutory amendments required under electoral rules.
The Supreme Court’s clarification leaves the validity of the revised Form 6 open for consideration in the pending proceedings.
Also Read: CJI Surya Kant Writes Letter To Rahul Gandhi: ‘Approach Court Through Petition’
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: abplive.com
