Rebuts 'Illegal Form 6 Changes' Claim, Cites Supreme Court Backing for Bihar SIR Order
_696198645.jpg)
In a sharp institutional confrontation over electoral procedures, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has officially fact-checked and dismissed allegations leveled by Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, terming his claims regarding unauthorized modifications to Form 6 as completely "misleading." The political flashpoint ignited on Monday, October 5, 2026, after Rahul Gandhi posted on social media alleging that Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar had "illegally and unilaterally made changes to Form 6" while citing a recent oral observation by the Supreme Court. Swiftly responding through its official verification handle, the poll panel clarified that no statutory alterations were made to the core Form 6 template itself, and that the accompanying declaration issued during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar received unanimous internal approval and judicial validation from the apex court.
Anatomy of the Rebuttal: ECI Details Supreme Court Verdict and Unanimous Clearance
Rebutting the Congress leader's social media post point-by-point, the poll watchdog emphasized established legal and procedural timelines:
Unanimous Commission Endorsement: The Commission stated that the executive order issued on June 24, 2025, for executing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar was not an individual decision by the CEC, but was formally passed with the unanimous consent and approval of the full Commission.
Supreme Court Judgment of May 27, 2026: Countering claims of legal overreach, the ECI highlighted that the operational order governing Bihar's voter list revision was explicitly challenged and subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated May 27, 2026.
Press Note No. 120 Clarification: The poll body drew attention to Point 1(iii) of its Press Note No. 120 issued on September 26, 2026, which reiterated that the declaration annexure attached alongside Form 6 specifically for the intensive revision drive stands fully affirmed by the apex court.
No Alterations in Form 6 Itself: Why the Declaration Annexure Was Attached
ECI officials clarified the technical distinction between amending a statutory election form and appending a temporary verification schedule:
Form 6 Retains Original Statutory Format: Senior Election Commission officials confirmed via PTI that the statutory Form 6—prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules for new voter enrollment—remains completely untouched and unamended.
Purpose of the Attached Declaration: Rather than modifying the base template, an additional self-declaration schedule was annexed under the framework of the Bihar SIR exercise to verify residential credentials, weed out duplicate entries, and clean up historical discrepancies across state rolls.
Procedural Compliance: The poll panel emphasized that administering an supplementary verification declaration during specialized intensive revisions falls entirely within the Commission's constitutional mandate to maintain error-free voter lists ahead of democratic exercises.
What the Supreme Court Bench Observed: Scrutiny Over Revision Records
The controversy gained renewed national traction following specific remarks made during ongoing apex court hearings:
Bench Led by Chief Justice Surya Kant: A three-judge Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana had remarked during proceedings: "We have not approved any changes to Form 6. This should be clear. When the records are presented, we will want to see who made the changes."
Trigger for Political Accusations: Seizing on the bench's oral assertion that it had not sanctioned structural changes to Form 6, Rahul Gandhi escalated the matter publicly, questioning the procedural authority of the poll panel's leadership.
Awaiting Record Presentation: With the Election Commission placing its official fact-check on public record and reaffirming its reliance on the May 27 judgment, the legal scrutiny now turns toward the formal presentation of administrative records before the bench to demonstrate how the supplementary declaration was integrated into the Bihar revision drive.
_792049827_351x234.jpg)
_17098007_351x234.jpg)
_2053091736_351x234.jpg)
_1878852701_351x234.jpg)