New Delhi: While hearing the petition challenging the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi, the Supreme Court was on Wednesday (November 4) informed about a clarification issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) a day ago that voters whose names were deleted from draft rolls can indeed file Form 6 to register themselves as new voters, contrary to the top court’s observations made last week.Advocate Prashant Bhushan, making an oral mention for petitioners Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri before Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, submitted that the ECI’s statement dated November 3, issued to the chief electoral officers of all states/UTs, went against the Supreme Court’s observations in the previous hearing that deleted voters, whose names figured in the 2026 rolls, cannot be compelled to register themselves as new voters using Form 6.Responding to Bhushan, LiveLaw reported, CJI Kant said that the matter was still pending before the top court and that people need not be apprehensive. He asked the petitioners to file an application highlighting the ECI’s latest clarification, adding that the issue would be heard on November 19.The ECI’s clarification begins by noting that some voters are “hesitant to submit Form 6 as these voters are also required to furnish a declaration prescribed in Form 6 to the effect that their name is being included for the first time in Electoral Roll.”It goes on to clarify that such filing of Form 6 by a deleted voter would not amount to a false declaration even though they have voted before.“It is clarified that an elector whose name does not appear in the draft electoral roll may submit Form 6 to seek inclusion in the final electoral roll, in accordance with the prescribed procedure. Consequently, an elector whose name does not appear in the draft roll is required to seek inclusion afresh in the electoral roll under SIR or afterwards, irrespective of whether the elector had been enrolled previously. The submission of Form 6 in such circumstances is, therefore, for the purpose of inclusion in the electoral roll under SIR or afterwards and is not, by itself, false merely because the elector was previously enrolled,” the statement reads.Further relying on the Delhi high court’s observation in Nilotpal Datta v. ECI, the poll body stated that such persons need not fear prosecution for false declaration, and that no prosecution will be taken against them merely on the ground that they have voted before. However, the petitioners have submitted in the top court that the high court’s order of October 14 preceded the Supreme Court’s observations, and that the issue of structural incongruity of use of Form 6 for ASDD voters was not examined in it.The petitioners have also submitted a letter to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar reinstating the Supreme Court’s observations on October 28 that forcing voters deleted during SIR to fill Form 6, which contains the declaration of being a first-time voter, is “an error” and would amount to a “structural incongruity”.The Supreme Court had questioned the ECI on why a voter who is already on the electoral roll should have to fill Form 6 to seek inclusion in the draft roll simply because the poll body official could not reach them during SIR.Notably, out of the 47 lakh voters whose names were placed on the ASDD list during the first phase of SIR in Delhi, 31.59 lakh have been marked as permanently shifted and 11.73 lakh as untraceable/absent (those who did not submit the enumeration form within the deadline).“The SC orally directed that voters who have been deleted because they shifted residence should be allowed to fill Form 8, which is the statutory form for shifting of residence/correction. The court noted that it is common for people to shift residence for economic reasons or to be closer to their place of work,” they wrote in the letter, as seen by The Wire.The petitioners reiterated that the top court had observed that deleted voters, who were marked absent/untraceable, “should be permitted to fill enumeration forms even at this stage and not be forced to enroll as new voters using Form 6”. “The bench of CJI Justice Surya Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana stressed that failure to submit enumeration form in time should not result in forfeiture of right to vote which is a vital right,” the letter noted.The petitioners have demanded that the ECI give “clear instructions” to accept Form 8/enumeration forms from voters on the ASDD list “without forcing them to submit Form 6, which contains the declaration of being a first-time voter.”For our full coverage on the SIR and the issues it has brought to citizens, click here.