SIR CONTROVERSY: ECI submits clarification in Supreme Court; calls petitioners’ allegations baseless

STC NEWS MONITORING DESK
SRINAGAR, OCTOBER 27 (STC): Defending its decision to implement the Special Comprehensive Review (SIR) of the electoral rolls in the Supreme Court, the Election Commission of India has said that the process of revision of the electoral rolls has been carried out in accordance with the law and the three orders issued in this regard were issued with the unanimous approval of the three members of the Commission.
According to the reports, in its counter affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, the Election Commission denied the allegations that the Commission took several decisions related to the SIR without the approval of two Election Commissioners, including the alleged changes in Form 6 used for voter registration. The Commission clarified that no amendment has been made in the prescribed legal procedure for voter registration and Form 6.
According to the commission, Chief Election Commissioner Gianish Kumar and both Election Commissioners have also unanimously approved the counter-affidavit filed in the Supreme Court. The Election Commission told the court that the orders issued on June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025 and May 14, 2026 regarding the implementation of the SIR were issued with the unanimous approval of all three members of the commission, namely the Chief Election Commissioner and two Election Commissioners.
The commission also said in its stand that there is no basis to prevent the Chief Election Commissioner from performing his duties, as newspaper reports are not considered evidence in the eyes of law.
Earlier, on October 5, the Supreme Court had said that it would review all relevant decisions of the Election Commission and those decisions which are found not to be in accordance with the law can be quashed. The court also issued notices to the central government and the Election Commission on the matter.
The petitions were filed after the Indian Express newspaper claimed in a report on September 25 that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had placed objections on record at least 14 times over the decisions and orders related to the special comprehensive revision of electoral rolls during the last ten months. According to the report, both the commissioners maintained that certain orders were issued without their knowledge or recommendation.
Following this report, protests were raised by the opposition parties and demands were also made for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gaynesh Kumar from office. In its reply affidavit, the Election Commission said that the Special Comprehensive Review process was initiated in exercise of the constitutional powers conferred under Article 324 of the Constitution of India, which should be read with the Representation of the People Act, 1950 and the relevant rules.
Rejecting the allegations of change in Form 6, the commission explained that the declaration used during the SIR is a separate document and is not part of the prescribed statutory form for inclusion of names in the electoral roll.
According to the commission, the purpose of this declaration is to facilitate verification of the eligibility of applicants and to link their details with the electoral rolls prepared during the special electoral review conducted in the past.
The Election Commission further stated that the format of the declaration introduced in the later stages of the SIR was changed compared to the existing format. However, the aim was to make the process easier for the applicants. Under this, voters themselves can provide the details of themselves or their relatives as mentioned in the previous electoral rolls.
According to the affidavit, applicants whose details can be linked to the previous electoral rolls can submit a declaration along with Form 6 and will not be required to submit additional documents. However, applicants who are unable to provide the details of themselves or their relatives in the previous electoral rolls, or whose records cannot be matched with the previous lists, will have to submit the relevant documents as per the prescribed procedures.
The Election Commission told the court that steps have also been taken to facilitate those voters whose details cannot be linked to the previous electoral rolls or whose records have discrepancies.
The Commission further said that the special comprehensive review process does not affect the right of eligible citizens who wish to apply for inclusion of their names in the electoral rolls after the completion of this process. The normal process of updating the electoral rolls will continue under the relevant rules. The Election Commission appealed to the Supreme Court to reject the objections raised by the petitioners as being based on misunderstanding.
(Straight Talk Communications I Inputs from Agencies)