Context

• The Election Commission of India (ECI) is a constitutional body responsible for conducting free and fair elections and safeguarding citizens’ voting rights.
• Its credibility rests on institutional independence, transparency, impartiality and public trust.
• Controversies surrounding electoral-roll revisions, changes to Form 6, alleged misuse of Form 7 and technological interference have raised concerns about its legal authority and administrative functioning.

Disturbing Conduct and Institutional Credibility

• The ECI has played a vital role in strengthening Indian democracy.
• However, allegations of inconsistent enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during the 2019 and 2024 general elections, discriminatory treatment of Opposition parties and inadequate responses to electoral-roll complaints have generated public criticism.
• The 2023 legislation governing the appointment of Election Commissioners has further intensified concerns.
• The selection committee comprises the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
• Critics argue that this arrangement increases executive influence over appointments.
• These controversies demonstrate that even the perception of political favouritism can undermine constitutional independence and institutional credibility.

Form 6: A Declaration Beyond the Rules

• Purpose and Requirements of Form 6
  • Form 6 is used by first-time voters and eligible individuals shifting constituencies to apply for inclusion in electoral rolls.
  • Applicants provide details concerning their identity, age, ordinary residence and citizenship.
• The Introduction of an Additional Declaration
  • The controversy emerged when the ECI’s June 24, 2025 notification introducing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) required an additional declaration, Annexure D, alongside Form 6 or Form 8 in specified circumstances.
  • The declaration classified applicants according to their birth dates and sought documents relating to citizenship eligibility.
• Legal and Constitutional Concerns
  • Critics argued that these requirements exceeded the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
  • Section 28 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 empowers the Central Government to make rules for implementing the Act, raising questions about the ECI’s authority to introduce additional requirements unilaterally.
  • The changes also prompted concerns about introducing a National Register of Citizens (NRC) indirectly through electoral procedures.
  • Article 326 establishes the principle of universal adult suffrage, subject to constitutional and statutory qualifications.
• The Supreme Court and the ECI’s Response
  • In September 2025, the ECI stated that the declaration attached to Form 6 for the SIR had been upheld by the Supreme Court, while prescribed forms would apply outside the SIR period.
  • The Chief Justice of India subsequently observed that no modified Form 6 had been approved by the Court.
  • On October 1, 2026, the ECI instructed Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to compare current and pre-SIR electoral rolls, identify missing electors and facilitate eligible individuals’ enrolment.
• Implications of Using Two Versions of Form 6
  • The continued use of two versions of Form 6 raises questions about legal consistency, administrative necessity and equal treatment.
  • Additional documentation requirements must have a clear legal basis and must not create arbitrary barriers to voter registration.

Wider Concerns: Form 7 and Electoral-Roll Manipulation

• Form 7 permits objections to electoral-roll entries, including requests for deletion on legally recognised grounds.
• However, reports of bulk applications in Uttarakhand, Karnataka and other States have raised concerns about attempts to remove eligible voters through questionable objections.
• Failure to investigate fraudulent or frivolous applications could weaken electoral integrity.
• Every objection requires proper verification, appropriate notice and an opportunity for the affected elector to respond.

Constitutional Principles and Democratic Accountability

• The right to vote is fundamental to representative democracy.
• Although accurate electoral rolls require verification, administrative procedures must not create disproportionate barriers to participation.
• The ECI must balance electoral accuracy with voter inclusion.
• Three principles are essential:
  • Legality: Electoral procedures must comply with the Constitution and applicable laws.
  • Transparency: Additions, deletions and objections must be properly documented and open to scrutiny.
  • Accountability: Officials and applicants must answer for fraudulent claims, misconduct and unauthorised interference.
• Technology can improve efficiency and prevent duplication, but systems must preserve officers’ statutory authority, maintain reliable audit trails and provide remedies against errors.
• Clear communication and reasoned decisions are equally important for restoring public confidence.

Conclusion

• Controversies surrounding Forms 6 and 7, the SIR and centralised electoral data have raised serious questions about the ECI’s legal authority and institutional credibility.
• Electoral-roll revision must improve accuracy without compromising citizens’ voting rights.
• The Commission must clarify additional documentation requirements, investigate suspicious objections, address technical failures and ensure that every eligible citizen can register.
• Ultimately, lawful procedures, impartial administration, independent oversight and democratic accountability are indispensable to public trust.
• Protecting electoral integrity and safeguarding the right to vote are complementary responsibilities, not competing objectives.