No action against voters seeking re-enrolment through Form 6: ECI

The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Tuesday (November 2, 2026) said no action would be taken against voters merely because they had been included in a previous electoral roll and then submitted Form 6 — meant for new voters — during the special intensive revision (SIR) process or afterwards, provided they were not already enrolled in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency.

In a letter to the chief electoral officers of all States and Union Territories, the ECI clarified that electors whose names do not appear in the draft roll must seek inclusion afresh under the SIR or afterwards, regardless of whether they 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,” it said.

The ECI said the clarification was in line with a Delhi High Court ruling in Nilotpal Datta & Anr. v. Election Commission of India & Ors. (W\.P. (C) No. 14955/2026), decided on October 14. In that case, the court held that an applicant’s concern that submitting Form 6 would amount to making a false declaration was misplaced.

It closed the proceedings, observing that the petitioners could submit Form 6 for processing in accordance with the law. The clarification comes amid concerns that voters re-enrolling through Form 6 could face penal provisions under electoral law because the form includes a declaration that they are first-time voters.

This declaration has been in force since August 1, 2022. The ECI’s letter directed that Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) should not initiate action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, merely because an elector had appeared in a previous electoral roll and submitted Form 6 during the SIR or afterwards.

This applies provided the elector is not already enrolled in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency and the declaration is otherwise in accordance with the law. In a letter to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, petitioner Anjali Bharadwaj said the Supreme Court had observed during the hearing that requiring voters deleted during the SIR to submit Form 6, which contains a first-time voter declaration, was an error.

The judges had described it as a “structural incongruity”. Ms. Bharadwaj said the court had orally directed that voters deleted because they had shifted residence should be allowed to submit Form 8, the statutory form for change of residence or correction.

“The Court also said that the 11.73 lakh deleted voters, who were marked absent/untraceable, should be permitted to fill enumeration forms even at this stage and not be forced to enrol as new voters using Form 6,” the letter said.