New Delhi: The form every new voter fills has quietly changed online. The law says only the Centre can change it. Two of the Commission's own members reportedly
said the same. Turn 18, log on to the Election Commission's ECINET portal to register as a voter, and you will meet a question your parents never had to answer. Were you, a parent or a grandparent on the voter list drawn up during the last Special Intensive Revision (SIR), the Commission's door-to-door recheck of the rolls? If so, give the constituency, booth and serial number. The online form will not go through until you answer. Download the paper Form 6 from the same portal, and the question isn't there. That gap now sits at the centre of the storm surrounding the Election Commission of India.
A form written into law
Form 6 is not just paperwork. It is written into law. Rule 13 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, says every claim to join the voter roll must be made in Form 6. Those rules are made by the Central Government under Section 28 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, "after consulting the Election Commission". Changes must be notified in the Official Gazette, the government's formal record, and laid before Parliament. Put simply: the Commission is consulted, but the Centre writes the form.
In July, Commission officials told reporters the new declaration had come in through administrative instructions, not a gazette notification. Their case was practical: it began in the Bihar SIR, links new voters to family already on the rolls, and cuts the documents applicants must produce.
Objections from within
This week, the question reached the Commission's own top table. According to The Indian Express, Election Commissioner Vivek Joshi recorded in May that Form 6 could not be changed through SIR instructions and that the legally sound route was to ask the government to amend the rules. Election Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu agreed. The declaration went online anyway. In August, Sandhu reportedly recorded that it was "unauthorised and illegal" and should be removed immediately.
Neither commissioner has spoken publicly. In a press note, the Commission said its orders carry full legal sanction and its final decisions, including on the SIR, were unanimous.
Two former chief election commissioners are not convinced. OP Rawat called the change "absolutely wrong and illegal". SY Quraishi said adding to Form 6 required amending the rules.
The row also tests how the Commission decides. Under Section 18 of the 2023 law governing election commissioners, the Commission acts unanimously as far as possible and by majority where members differ. In T N Seshan v Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court held that the Chief Election Commissioner does not outrank the other two when decisions are made.
The stakes are not abstract. Election Commission data shows the SIR has cut more than 8.7 crore names from draft rolls across its three phases, with some states still to report, and anyone left out must return through Form 6. The online declaration warns applicants that a false statement is punishable under Section 31 of the 1950 Act with up to a year in jail, a fine, or both. That is a heavy warning to attach to a question the rules never asked.
Until the Centre formally amends the form or the Commission withdraws the question, every new voter who registers online will be answering it anyway.
