PoliticsElectoral rolls
Supreme Court says it has never ruled on the new Form 6, agrees to examine it
The Bihar SIR judgment came before the new voter form existed, the bench said. It issued notice on a petition alleging the CEC took decisions without his two colleagues.
Key points
- The court said its May 2026 Bihar SIR judgment did not examine the new Form 6.
- The Election Commission had said in September that the court had upheld the Form 6 declaration.
- The petition is listed with other cases against the CEC on 27 October.
The Supreme Court said on Monday that it has neither approved nor rejected the Election Commission’s new Form 6 for voter registration, because the form did not exist when it decided the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) case in May.
“There is no adjudication on the new Form 6. That is all we have said,” Justice Joymalya Bagchi said. “We will examine it.”
The bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana issued notice on a petition by Priya Mishra and former Madhya Pradesh law minister P.C. Sharma. It will be heard on 27 October with other petitions against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
Why the form matters
The new declaration attached to Form 6 asks people registering as new voters whether they or their parents were mapped in the previous SIR. The form used in earlier state revisions did not ask this. In a press release on 26 September, the Election Commission suggested the Supreme Court had upheld the declaration in its Bihar judgment.
Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi reportedly objected that the change could not be made unless the Centre first amended the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. The petitioners rely on those objections.
What the petition says
The petition alleges that Gyanesh Kumar took about 14 decisions over roughly 10 months without the agreement of the other two commissioners. It asks the court to quash them, to call for the minutes, agendas and dissent notes, and to direct the Commission to reconsider the decisions collectively.
Arguing for the petitioners, advocate Narendra Mishra said the court had already made clear on 5 October that it had not approved Form 6. The Chief Justice cautioned him against picking up words from the bench. “Don’t pick up words like this,” he said.