New Delhi: The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Tuesday, November 2, 2026, clarified that no action would be taken against voters who were previously included in an electoral roll but submitted Form 6 during or after the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), provided they were not already enrolled in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency.
In a letter to the chief electoral officers of all States and Union Territories, the ECI said electors whose names were missing from the draft roll must seek inclusion afresh under the SIR or afterwards, irrespective of their previous enrolment.
“The submission of Form 6 in such circumstances is, therefore, for the purpose of inclusion in the electoral roll under SIR or afterwards and is not, by itself, false merely because the elector was previously enrolled,” it said.
Election Commission of India, ECI, Special Intensive Revision, SIR, Form 6, Form 8, Delhi High Court, Supreme Court, Electoral Rolls, Anjali Bharadwaj
The clarification follows a Delhi High Court ruling in Nilotpal Datta & Anr. v. Election Commission of India & Ors. (W\.P. (C) No. 14955/2026), decided on October 14. The court held that concerns about Form 6 amounting to a false declaration were misplaced and allowed the petitioners to submit the form for processing according to law.
Concerns had emerged that voters re-enrolling through Form 6 could face penalties because the form declares that applicants are first-time voters. This declaration has been in force since August 1, 2022.
The ECI directed Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) not to initiate action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, merely because previously enrolled electors submitted Form 6 during or after the SIR, subject to the stated conditions.
Meanwhile, petitioners in the Delhi SIR case urged the ECI to implement a Supreme Court directive allowing voters deleted from the Absent/Shifted/Dead/Duplicate list to use enumeration forms and/or Form 8.
In a letter to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, petitioner Anjali Bharadwaj said the court had described requiring deleted voters to submit Form 6 as a “structural incongruity”.
She said voters deleted due to shifting residence should be allowed to submit Form 8. The letter also said 11.73 lakh voters marked absent or untraceable should be permitted to fill enumeration forms rather than being forced to enrol as new voters using Form 6.
