'What Is SIR's Purpose If Citizens Are Being Removed From Voter's List? Bombay High Court Asks ECI

The Bombay High Court bench at Goa on Monday (October 5) orally questioned the manner in which the election authority has been deleting names of citizens under the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

Reminding the Election Commission of India (ECI) of the Supreme Court's observations that the Commission is obligated to ensure that all Indian Citizens are included in the final voter list, a division bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar told ECI:

"Read the judgment, it says ECI has an obligation to ensure that all Indian citizens are on the list... If citizens are excluded what will we do with your SIR? If citizens are being removed from the list then what is the purpose of this entire SIR process then?"

The judges also reminded the ECI of the provisions of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which makes it clear that unless the draft roll under the SIR is finalised, the existing roll/voter list would continue to hold the field. It therefore objected to the ECI dropping names of citizens from the SIR of not submitting the pre-filled enumeration form.

"By the SIR, what you are doing is, you are not removing people from the draft roll but effectively from the existing roll... Your argument now is that since SIR is underway, we shouldn't look at the existing roll and only focus on the draft roll... We just cannot ignore the existing list," the bench remarked. 

The observations were made while hearing a petition filed by one Salgaonkar family, which has claimed that their names have been dropped from the draft electoral roll, despite they filing a Form 8 (for changing address).

The ECI has however, maintained that under the SIR guidelines, it is compulsory for a voter to submit a pre-filled enumeration form - a form which the bench remarked never existed in the history of our country.

The ECI has contended that for a voter to get his address changed in the new voter list, s/he must submit the enumeration form along with the Form 8 and if some voter fails to submit the enumeration form then s/he must fill in Form 6 (new inclusion).

The judges objected to this argument after noting that the enumeration form annexes to it a 'declaration' that the said voter (who signs it) continues to reside in the area as mentioned in the existing voters list. The bench said that the ECI cannot force citizens to make false declarations, if they have changed their residence, they cannot be asked to mandatorily submit the enumeration forms. 

"If a voter comes to you with Form 8, saying he has changed his address you just cannot tell that person that look your name isn't included in the draft roll now you will have to fill in Form 6 (inclusion of new voter). Your enumeration form, basically has a declaration that a person continues to live in the address as mentioned in the existing voters list. But consider, if someone has changed their residence, can you compel the person to make a false declaration by submitting that pre-filled enumeration? Why can't that person simply give a Form 8 because anyway, his name is there in the existing list he just wants to get his address changed.. Why compel enumeration form?" Justice Menezes observed. 

The bench pointed out that Rule 12 provides for objections etc and taking recourse to that provision, why can't a citizen directly submit Form 8 instead of mandatorily submitting the pre-filled enumeration form.

"When someone doesn't live in a particular address, why should that person make a false declaration by submitting that pre-filled enumeration form? It will be a false declaration because under the said enumeration form, there is a declaration that X person continues to live here... The point is you cannot compel someone to make such a false declaration. Also, no citizen must sign this enumeration form of yours...they just shouldn't sign... How can someone apply for inclusion in the voter list when they don't live in that particular constituency or ward?" the bench remarked. 

The observations were made while ECI counsel Gaurish Agni argued that it was mandatory for the voters to submit the enumeration forms to get their names included in the draft voter list. 

The bench will continue hearing the matter on Tuesday (October 6).