The Election Commission of India has told voters whose names were deleted from draft electoral rolls that they can re-enrol using Form 6, and that filing the form will not lead to prosecution for a false declaration. The clarification, sent to the chief electoral officers of all states and union territories on Tuesday, addresses fears among voters who were removed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the rolls. The Commission said submitting Form 6 in these circumstances is not, by itself, false merely because the voter was previously enrolled.
Form 6 and the fear of prosecution
The worry centred on the declaration in Form 6, which states that the applicant’s name is being included in the electoral roll for the first time. Voters who had been enrolled for years feared that signing it would amount to a false declaration under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which carries penalties of up to one year in prison or a fine. The Commission said no action under Section 31 would be initiated against an elector merely because they had been included in a previous roll and then submitted Form 6. The declaration format has been in force since 1 August 2022. The protection applies only if the applicant is not already enrolled in another parliamentary or assembly constituency and the declaration is otherwise in line with the law.
Form 6: what the courts have said
The Commission’s clarification followed a Delhi High Court order of 14 October, which dismissed the apprehension that submitting the form would amount to a false declaration. The case, Nilotpal Datta and another v Election Commission of India, dealt with voters removed from Delhi’s draft rolls. The Supreme Court has since agreed to examine whether voters removed during the revision should have to re-enrol through Form 6 at all. A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, heard the matter on Wednesday and fixed the next hearing for 19 November. The Chief Justice said people need not be apprehensive while the matter is pending.
The dispute covers voters whose names appeared on electoral rolls until May-June 2026 and were then left out of the draft list published during the revision. In Delhi, the draft roll published on 31 August 2026 removed around 47.7 lakh names from a list of about 1.45 crore electors. Of those placed in the Absent, Shifted, Dead or Duplicate category, 31.59 lakh were classified as shifted and 11.73 lakh as absent or untraceable. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, arguing for petitioners Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, told the court that requiring these voters to complete Form 6 put them in the same category as first-time applicants.
The Delhi revision schedule has been revised three times. Under the latest timeline, the final electoral roll was scheduled for publication on 4 November 2026. Those whose names are missing from the draft roll can file claims for inclusion between 31 August and 30 September, along with the prescribed forms and supporting documents. The enumeration phase resulted in forms being collected and uploaded for about 97.51 lakh electors.
The Supreme Court had indicated on 28 October that shifted voters should have access to Form 8 rather than being required to seek registration through Form 6. The Election Commission’s clarification did not address that route directly, and opposition leaders said it changed nothing. Congress called the clarification another set of word games that clarify nothing, and Jairam Ramesh demanded that the revision exercise be stopped, arguing it was designed to exclude voters. The Commission has told state chief electoral officers to publicise the clarification, but local election offices report that no uniform standard operating procedures have been issued yet.
Voters whose names are missing from a draft roll can submit Form 6 to seek inclusion, during the revision and afterwards, regardless of their past enrolment history. The Commission said the process keeps the electoral database accurate and open to all eligible citizens. The Supreme Court will hear the objections to the Commission’s position on 19 November, and has said it could require the Commission to extend the deadline if circumstances warrant it.