Election Commission told the Supreme Court that all three SIR orders were approved unanimously by the CEC and both Election Commissioners.
The poll body rejected allegations of unilateral decision-making, questioned the petition’s reliance on a newspaper report and denied leaking internal documents.
The ECI said Form 6 remained unchanged during SIR and clarified that the accompanying declaration form was a separate document.
Gyanesh Kumar Did Not Act Alone On SIR Decisions, EC Tells Supreme Court
The poll body has defended its decision-making process before the Supreme Court, saying the three SIR orders were unanimous and the declaration form was separate from statutory Form 6
Summary
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has told the Supreme Court that all decisions related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls were taken unanimously, rejecting allegations that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar acted unilaterally.
In a counter-affidavit filed in response to a writ petition challenging Kumar’s functioning and the legality of certain ECI decisions, the poll body denied claims that SIR-related decisions were taken despite objections from the two other Election Commissioners.
The filing comes amid questions raised over the Commission’s decision-making process following a report by The Indian Express.
The ECI told the court that three SIR orders, dated June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025 and May 14, 2026, were approved unanimously. It also said the petition relied on a newspaper report to allege that the CEC had acted alone.
What EC Told The Court
The counter-affidavit was filed by Deputy Election Commissioner Bhanu Prakash Yeturu. It stated that the filing itself had been approved unanimously by the CEC and both Election Commissioners.
The Commission argued that the petition was based entirely on a newspaper report and that the petitioner had not independently verified the factual claims with the respondents. It cited this as a ground for arguing that the petition was not maintainable.
The affidavit also outlined the procedure followed for decisions within the Commission.
“The files put up by the respective divisions are sent first to one Election Commissioner and thereafter to the other Election Commissioner and then finally to the Chief Election Commissioner,” the affidavit stated.
It added that approved decisions were recorded in the relevant files and bore the signatures of the Election Commissioners and the CEC. The decisions were subsequently notified and implemented by the ECI Secretariat.
The Commission also denied leaking internal documents to the media, stating that it had neither released nor authorised the release of any internal note or file.
Advertisement
ECI’s Clarification On Form 6
The poll body also rejected allegations that changes had been made to Form 6, the statutory form used for voter registration.
The Commission maintained that none of the three SIR orders introduced any changes to the prescribed Form 6. It said the form continued to be used for registering new voters.
The ECI further clarified that the declaration form used alongside Form 6 was a separate document introduced as part of the SIR process. It maintained that this declaration form was distinct from the statutory voter registration form.
Published At: