New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday (October 28) questioned the Election Commission of India 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 Election Commission of India (ECI) official could not reach them during special intensive revision (SIR).It also said the right to vote was a “vital right” and a voter could not be deprived of it merely because they had failed to update their electoral details during the SIR.Hearing the writ petition filed by Anjali Bharadwaj and Amrita Johri over the various issues in the SIR exercise in Delhi, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana pointed out that Form 6 is meant only for first-time voters, where the applicants have to declare that they have not voted before. The top court underscored that in Delhi, there would be various persons on whom enumeration forms could not be served as they changed their addresses, or have temporarily gone out of the city for work.“Instead of burdening them to approach you, why don’t you reach out to them?” CJI Kant asked, as quoted by Supreme Court Observer. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioners, had submitted that 47 lakh persons from Delhi’s 1.45 crore voters had not returned their enumeration forms, and of them 43 lakh of these had been classified under ASDD (Absentee / Shifted / Duplicate / Deceased) list. He pointed out that many voters had not received their enumeration forms, because it carried their previous addresses, and the ECI required them to file Form 6 (for new voter) rather than Form 8 (to show change in address).Also read: In Four Booths, One in Three Removals Wrong: Public Hearing in Trilokpuri Puts Delhi SIR Under ScrutinyBhushan also argued that 19.34 lakh cases in Delhi lay under a ‘logical discrepancy’ category, and that the ECI had not clearly explained why.Justice Bagchi claimed that the top court had not ruled on the legality of the logical discrepancy list. He said its use had been permitted only as an interim arrangement in the West Bengal proceedings, while the Bihar SIR judgment had not examined the issue.Very significant hearing in the Supreme Court today in our Delhi SIR matter.– The Court questioned why deleted voters (ASDD List) are being asked to fill Form 6 and make a false declaration that they are new voters, even though they were on the 2026 electoral roll. Court termed this a structural incongruity, which has to be addressed. Instead of filling Form 6, such people should be allowed to fill enumeration form or Form 8 for those who shifted.– Details of 47 lakh people on the ASDD list must be easily accessible, in simple Hindi and in the local area at the booth or block level. ECI must reach out to such people as many of them would be labourers, hawkers, daily wagers etc.– Deadline should be extended for filling of enumeration form or Form 8 as there are no elections scheduled to be held in Delhi.– The bench clearly stated that they HAVE NOT ADJUDICATED upon the legality of Logical Discrepancy category. Said that it was not adjudicated upon in the Bihar SIR case and clarified that they had only allowed it as an interim measure for West Bengal.Matter listed for hearing after 2 weeks.— Anjali Bhardwaj (@AnjaliB_) October 28, 2026On the issue of 47 lakh people in ASDD list, the court asked ECI why they couldn’t be given an opportunity to fill enumeration forms or file Form 8.Justice Baghchi, LiveLaw reported, asked senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing the ECI: “You call upon the person to file Form 6, declaring my name was never in the list. It’s an error.”“SIR Form 6 should say my name is not included in the 2003 voters list. But if you take 2026 as cutoff, and someone has shifted, you have to permit them Form 8,” he added.The top court termed it a structural incongruity, and said it has to be addressed.The CJI suggested that the ECI can, in a statement or circular, “clarify that Form 6 is required to be filled only by those who want to register as first time voters in NCT of Delhi.” The court also suggested that the deadline for filling of enumeration form or Form 8 should be extended as there are no elections scheduled in Delhi.Meanwhile, Justice Bagchi noted that Form 6, Form 7, Form 8 are “cast in stone” and cannot be changed, though in the SIR process, the ECI has residual powers to add to them by seeking declarations. Justice Bagchi suggested that a declaration can be sought as to why they could not collect or respond to the enumeration form.For our full coverage on the SIR and the issues it has brought to citizens, click here.