New Delhi: Professor Apoorvanand has criticised the Supreme Court’s handling of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, questioning the Court’s role in allowing the process to continue and raising concerns over Form-6.
Apoorvanand argued that concerns relating to Form-6 had been brought to the attention of the authorities earlier, but he questioned whether those concerns received adequate consideration. He also criticised the Supreme Court’s approach to ensuring that the SIR exercise was not obstructed.
His comments come amid continuing legal and public debate over the SIR process, voter inclusion and exclusion, and the procedures being followed for electoral roll revision.
Separate Supreme Court development over Form-6
- The Form-6 issue has also come up separately before the Supreme Court.
- Form-6 is the application used by eligible citizens to seek inclusion of their names in the electoral roll.
- During the SIR process, an additional declaration was introduced alongside the online Form-6. The declaration sought information connected with applicants’ names, or those of their parents or grandparents, in earlier electoral rolls.
- The Election Commission has maintained that the statutory Form-6 itself was not amended and that the additional declaration was part of the SIR process.
- However, during a hearing on October 5, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant clarified that the Supreme Court had not approved any modified Form-6.
- The Court also indicated that it wanted to examine the relevant records and establish who had made or authorised the changes.
Why the issue matters
- The controversy is centred on whether the additional SIR declaration should be regarded as a modification of Form-6 or as a separate requirement introduced for the SIR exercise.
- The Election Commission and the Supreme Court have therefore provided different descriptions of the issue, making the relevant records and the Court’s further proceedings important.
- At present, the Supreme Court has not made a final finding that the Election Commission illegally modified Form-6. The Court has sought clarification and records concerning the matter.
- Apoorvanand’s criticism should therefore be understood as his assessment of the Supreme Court’s handling of SIR, while the questions surrounding Form-6 remain part of an ongoing legal proceeding.
- The developments have added to the wider debate over electoral roll revisions, voter documentation and the safeguards required during the SIR process.
Business Galaxy will continue to follow the Supreme Court proceedings and developments concerning SIR, Form-6 and electoral-roll revisions.
