The Supreme Court on Monday, October 5, in its oral observations while refusing to pass an interim order to suspend Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, distanced itself from changes brought to Form 6 by saying that it had not approved the modification. The Election Commission of India (ECI) subsequently, in a fact-check post on X responding to leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi, reiterated its September 26 press note and said: “The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”The timeline of the SIR, however, shows that the ECI’s response is misleading. The Wire, in July, reported on how Form 6, the statutory application Indians need to fill for inclusion in the electoral rolls, quietly underwent changes during the SIR. In June 2025, the ECI appended a new declaration to the form. The declaration required voters to provide one of 11 documents as documentary proof. It was the Bihar SIR and its documentation framework that was before the Supreme Court when it delivered its judgement in May 2026. Prior to the delivery of the judgement, the Election Commission in October, in the second phase of the SIR, added another page to the Form 6 declaration that required voters to map their parents’ details to the previous SIR. In the third phase of the SIR now underway in 16 states and union territories, which was announced in May, the online Form 6 itself has been changed. This online Form 6 application does not allow voters to proceed to the next step to successfully complete their application unless they provide details of their parents’ details from the previous SIR.This change to the Form 6 as a whole, The Wire has previously reported, cannot be done without parliament’s approval. The Supreme Court’s May judgement too had held that the Election Commission retains a degree of authority to formulate an appropriate documentation framework suited to the exigencies of a SIR, such authority is “not unbounded” and must remain in the existing statutory scheme. The Wire also reported this following the poll body’s press release on September 26, citing the Supreme Court order in its defence of changes to the Form 6.The judgement did not take into account this change made to the online Form 6, as this change came into effect in July, well after the Supreme Court delivered its order in May upholding the Form 6 declaration for the Bihar SIR.This why the Election Commission’s response on Monday is misleading. Consider the timeline:June 2025: New declaration to Form 6 for Bihar SIRWhen the Bihar SIR was first announced on June 24, 2025, it added a new prescribed declaration form. The declaration asked voters to provide one of the 11 listed documents listed to show their place of birth if born before 1987, or if born after 1987 but before 2004 to show their place of birth and establish date of birth and/or place of birth of either parent, and for those born after 2004 to establish the same for both parents.October 2025: Revised declaration with Form 6 in October for 12 states and UTsIn October when the poll body announced the exercise for 12 states and union territories, it quietly included a new page with new instructions that revised the declaration form to be appended with Form 6. This declaration form required voters to include their parents’ details in the previous SIR along with the same declaration sought in Bihar.May 2025: Supreme Court delivers verdict upholding Bihar SIROn May 27, the Supreme Court delivered its judgement upholding the Bihar SIR. While upholding the declaration. In the judgement while upholding the Form 6 declaration that was brought in the Bihar SIR – that was then only asking for one of the 11 documents being sought in the exercise – the Supreme Court’s judgement also included a crucial caution. It made it clear that while the Election Commission retains a degree of authority to formulate an appropriate documentation framework suited to the exigencies of a SIR, such authority is “not unbounded” and must remain in the existing statutory scheme.“In devising such a framework, the Commission must remain cognisant of the existing statutory scheme, and any departure therefrom must be informed by a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved,” the order said.“The formulation of the documentation regime must thus reflect a calibrated balance in drawing from the statutory framework, while adapting it, where necessary, to effectively serve the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the electoral roll,” it said.July 2026: Online Form 6 changedDuring the present round of SIR, underway in 16 states and union territories, the Form 6 itself has been changed for online applications. The Form 6 not only included the same amended Form 6 to include the new declaration form as in October but the Election Commission also quietly changed the online application form as a whole. This online Form 6 application does not allow voters to proceed to the next step to successfully complete their application unless they provide details of their parents’ details from the previous SIR.This change to the Form 6 itself, The Wire has reported, cannot be done without parliament’s approval. The Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 that flows from the Section 28 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 require that any change or amendment to the form can only be made by the government and is subject to parliamentary oversight.Two out of three Election Commissioners objected to this change in MayThe Indian Express reported last month that in May, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had said on record the Form 6 cannot be changed without the government amending the rules. Sandhu had expressly agreed to this. But the change was made anyway. Sandhu put on record on August 13 that it was “unauthorised and illegal” and “must be removed immediately”.What happened in the Supreme CourtIn the Supreme Court on Monday during the hearing on petitions seeking the suspension of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, Senior Advocate Maneka Guruswamy raised the new Form 6 being used in the Delhi SIR which is now underway. CJI Kant then said that the court had not approved of any modified Form 6.“Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let’s be clear. When the record is produced, we would like to see who has modified,” CJI Surya Kant was quoted as saying by LiveLaw.Election Commission’s responseThe Election Commission has in its press note on September 26, following the furore over the Indian Express’ report on the objections raised by the two Election Commissioners on this change to Form 6, misled on what the Supreme Court judgement said, as well as which declaration to Form 6 was before the court in the first place.The Wire had reported this on September 27 as well.On Monday, despite the CJI’s observations on the changes to Form 6 in the Delhi SIR – which includes the change to the online form – the Election Commission has once again pointed to the apex court’s May order. When asked, Election Commission spokespersons simply pointed to the September 26 press release which said that the Supreme Court had upheld the declaration to Form 6.The Wire has sent a detailed questionnaire to the Election Commission by email and has not heard back yet. This report will be updated when it does.Unanswered questionsWhile simply pointing to its September 26 press release in its fact check, the Election Commission has not addressed how the page 2 of the declaration to Form 6 was added in October 2025, or how the change to the online Form 6 was made if the two Election Commissioners objected on record, as decisions of the poll body require majority decision-making. It has also not addressed how the statutory changes made to Form 6 were done, on whose instructions, and why parliament was not taken on board. It has also not made clear its position on the judgement itself making clear that the poll body has the authority to come up with appropriate documentation framework suited to the exigencies of a SIR, such authority is “not unbounded” and must remain in the existing statutory scheme.For our full coverage on the SIR and the issues it has brought to citizens, click here.