Last Updated:
The court’s Goa bench held that asking previously registered voters to fill Form 6 forces them to falsely declare that their names never appeared on any electoral roll
The High Court emphasised that under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, Form 8 is the sole legal mechanism intended for voters updating their residential details within an existing electoral database. Representational image/PTI
The Goa bench of the Bombay High Court ruled that forcing existing voters who have shifted residence to submit Form 6 or pre-filled enumeration forms during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise compels them to make false declarations. The court observed that submitting such declarations exposes citizens to potential prosecution under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
The landmark judgment came in a writ petition filed by members of the Salgaonkar family, whose names were deleted from the electoral roll after they relocated within the Santacruz assembly constituency. The bench comprising Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar ordered the Election Commission of India (ECI) to immediately restore the six family members to the final voters’ list.
‘ECI Cannot Force Citizens to Declare Falsehoods’
The dispute arose after local election officials refused to accept the petitioners’ Form 8—the statutory application designated for updating an address change. Instead, authorities demanded that the shifted voters either complete a pre-filled enumeration form confirming their old address or submit Form 6which is strictly reserved for enrolling first-time voters.
Refusing to accept the poll panel’s stance, the High Court held that asking previously registered voters to fill Form 6 forces them to falsely declare that their names never appeared on any electoral roll. The judges noted that statutory election forms lose their fundamental legal purpose if administrative convenience or software constraints overwrite statutory provisions.
Statutory Integrity of Form 8 Upheld
The High Court emphasised that under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, Form 8 is the sole legal mechanism intended for voters updating their residential details within an existing electoral database. Compelling a registered elector to apply afresh under Form 6 misrepresents their legal status and creates a risk of criminal liability.
Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act prescribes imprisonment or fines for making false written statements in connection with electoral rolls. By validating the family’s refusal to sign untrue declarations, the ruling protects electors from systemic procedural errors and sets a key legal precedent for electoral roll revisions across the country.
Quick Answers
Ask News18The Bombay High Court ruled that forcing previously registered voters who relocated to submit Form 6 compels them to falsely declare that their names never appeared on any electoral roll, which could expose them to prosecution under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
Ask News18About the Author
Pathikrit Sen Gupta is a Senior Associate Editor with News18.com and likes to cut a long story short. He writes sporadically on Politics, Sports, Global Affairs, Space, Entertainment, And Food. He tra…Read More
November 07, 2026, 01:57 IST
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]
