Click the Play button to listen to article

A voter shifting from one residence to another can only fill the Form 8 and cannot be insisted upon to fill in the pre-filled enumeration form or the Form 6 (new inclusion) during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process, held the Bombay High Court(Goa Bench) saying that filling such Form 6 or the pre-filled enumeration form would amount to false declaration.

A division bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar noted that these Form 6 and enumeration form have specific declarations, annexed to it. As regards Form 6, the declaration states that the applicant (filing the said form) is not included in any of the voters' list and that they have applied for the first time for registration as a voter. Whereas, the enumeration form comes with a declaration that the said voter continues to reside in the same address as mentioned in the pre-filled form. 

The judges noted that the Form 8 is for voters, who are already in the existing voters' list and have only changed their residence from one area of the constituency to the another. 

"Having considered the specific declarations that are to be made by a new voter in contrast to those that are required to be made by a voter who is applying for shifting of residence, it would be quite obvious that if a voter shifting residence as in the case of the present Petitioners, had filed an application in Form 6, they would not only be making a false declaration in their application for inclusion in an Electoral Roll for the first time, but would also be falsely declaring that their name was not included in any Assembly Constituency or Parliamentary Constituency in the past. A voter shifting from one residence to another can only file an application in Form 8, since he is a voter whose name already exists either in one Part of constituency, and would be shifting either to a different Part in the same constituency or to a different constituency," the bench said. 

As regards the enumeration Form, the judges, after seeing its contents, said that the Petitioners, who had already shifted residence to a different Part of the constituency, cannot be asked to fill it. The bench opined "they could never be forced to sign the declarations to the Enumeration Form, as they would obviously be false declarations. In the circumstances faced by the Petitioners therefore, the only option open to them was to file Form 8 which is what they did."

"Even if the Petitioners were given this Form, they would be obviously filing a false declaration, since the Form contained their pre-filled previous address from where they had shifted residence. There was no system by which a blank form (not pre-filled) could be furnished to the Petitioners at their new residence. The insistence on the Petitioners filing Form 6 by the BLO/ERO as stated the Affidavit in reply, in our opinion is completely misplaced. According to us, the Declarations that the Petitioner was called upon to give, in the pre- filled Enumeration Form or in Form 6 or in the Form provided in the Annexure D to the SIR would all result in the same being false and rendering the Petitioners open to prosecution for offences punishable under Section 31 of the RP Act," the judges held. 

The bench passed the order while ordering the ECI to restore the names of six members of the Salgaonkar family, whose names were deleted during the recently concluded SIR process in Goa. The bench noted that the family members, who had shifted from one area of the Santacruz constituency to another, had submitted the Form 8 (for changing their residence). However, the election authorities refused to accept the said Form 8 on the ground that the petitioners did not submit the enumeration form along with the Form 8. While rejecting their Form 8 the authorities had asked the family to fill the Form 6. 

Also from the judgment - ECI Must Accept Form 8 For Voters' Change Of Address Even During SIR; Can't Ask Them To File Form 6 : Bombay High Court

Tags: