Form 6 unchanged, online SIR form and declaration separated from Oct 21: EC to SC

The EC’s central claim was that statutory Form 6 remained unchanged. Form 6 is prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and the EC said only the central government can amend it. The SIR declaration, it maintained, was separate and had not been inserted into the form.

The confusion came from the online portal. It displayed Form 6 and the declaration together, allowing applicants to use one OTP and electronic signature. The EC admitted that this layout could suggest the official form itself had changed, even though the documents were legally separate.

From October 21, the online process was split into two parts: Form 6 and the separate SIR declaration. The EC said this matched the existing physical-form process. Its affidavit responded to a petition challenging the alleged Form 6 changes and other issues involving the Chief Election Commissioner.

Form 6 is the official application used by people seeking fresh inclusion in the electoral rolls. In the article, it is described as the online application form used by first-time voters to register. It is therefore the basic document for applicants who want their names added as electors.

The form has legal status because it is prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. That matters in the dispute because the EC argued that only the central government can amend it. The commission said its SIR declaration had not been incorporated into Form 6.

Applicants could submit Form 6 through the online portal or in physical form. During the SIR exercise, the portal displayed an additional declaration alongside it, creating confusion. From October 21, the EC separated the two online documents, as they already were in the physical process.

The SIR declaration was introduced during the Special Intensive Revision exercise. The Election Commission said it was separate from statutory Form 6. Applicants seeking inclusion in the electoral rolls had to provide an additional statement about their connection to an earlier electoral roll.

Specifically, applicants had to state whether their own name, or the name of a parent or grandparent, appeared in an earlier SIR-era roll. In Bihar, the June 24, 2025 order called this document Annexure D and referred to previous rolls dating back to 2002. The declaration therefore required family-based historical information.

Critics said this could create an extra hurdle for first-time voters, especially when their families were absent from older rolls. The requirement remained in places where the revision was still underway. The EC removed it from online Form 6 in states and Union Territories where the SIR exercise had been completed.

Displaying the two documents together blurred an important distinction. Form 6 was the statutory application prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The SIR declaration was an additional document introduced for the revision exercise. Although the EC said the form itself was unchanged, the online design could make users believe new requirements had been added to it.

The portal used one combined online flow. Applicants could complete Form 6 and the declaration with a single one-time password and electronic signature. That convenience also made the documents appear connected, rather than separate legal and administrative steps.

The EC acknowledged this risk in its Supreme Court affidavit. It said the online application was divided into two parts from October 21. The change separated Form 6 from the SIR declaration online, bringing the digital process in line with the physical-form process and addressing the appearance of an unauthorized amendment.

The main online change was structural, not an amendment to Form 6. The Election Commission split the application into two parts: the statutory Form 6 and the separate SIR declaration. It said this decision was taken on October 21 after recognizing that the earlier layout could create a misleading impression.

Before the change, both documents appeared together on the online portal. Applicants could use one OTP and electronic signature to complete the process. In practice, that single digital flow made the additional declaration look as though it had been added to Form 6 itself.

The physical process already kept the documents separate. The EC said the revised online arrangement matched that existing practice. The declaration continued in places where the SIR was underway, while it had been removed from online Form 6 in states and Union Territories where the revision was complete.

The Election Commission said the SIR decisions involved all three members of the commission. They were Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. This directly addressed allegations that Gyanesh Kumar had acted alone.

The EC identified three SIR orders and said each was based on a unanimous decision. Their dates were June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026. The commission also said its affidavit to the Supreme Court had been approved unanimously by all three members.

The EC described its normal file process as sequential. Files ordinarily go first to one Election Commissioner, then the other, and finally the CEC. In urgent matters, approvals may be obtained electronically and recorded later. It argued that comments or queries during processing do not themselves prove disagreement or separate decision-making.

Voter registration is the process through which an applicant seeks inclusion in an electoral roll. Form 6 is the application used for fresh registration, including by first-time voters. An electoral-roll revision is a broader exercise to review and update those records. The SIR was such a revision, with additional declarations required in places where it was underway.

The article’s dispute shows why process design matters. When the portal displayed Form 6 beside the SIR declaration, applicants could think the statutory form had acquired new requirements. The EC said the documents were separate, and it separated them online from October 21. In Bihar, the extra declaration linked applicants or relatives to earlier rolls.

Legal authority protects clarity and accountability. The EC said Form 6 is prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and only the central government can amend it. Therefore, an additional requirement should be clearly identified as separate, authorized, and applied through the proper process.