Election Commission Response to Supreme Court
The Election Commission of India (ECI) has officially informed the Supreme Court that all Systemic Identification of Records (SIR) orders issued between 2025 and 2026 were reached through unanimous consensus among its commissioners. In a formal affidavit submitted to the top court, the poll body explicitly denied accusations of unilateral decision-making by Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, countering recent political allegations that suggested a centralization of power within the commission.
This ongoing legal battle is a critical matter in India, as the Election Commission serves as the independent authority responsible for managing the world’s largest democratic elections. At the heart of the dispute is whether the current leadership has bypassed established multi-member consultative protocols. The integrity of voter registration forms—specifically Form 6, which is used by citizens to register to vote—is a cornerstone of the country's electoral process, making any alleged modification a subject of intense public and judicial scrutiny.
Status of Voter Registration Form 6
The Election Commission of India asserted in its Supreme Court filing that Form 6, used for voter enrollment, remains entirely unamended. The commission clarified that while certain procedural declarations related to the SIR process were implemented, these did not result in any functional or structural changes to the standard voter application form. The ECI characterized the declarations as entirely separate from the statutory registration document.
"All SIR decisions were unanimously taken, and Form 6 has not been amended," the Election Commission stated in its affidavit to the Supreme Court.
Contention and Opposition in Court
The ECI’s submission comes in response to a petition challenging the commission's internal processes. While the poll body has defended the legality and transparency of the SIR orders, the proceedings have faced pushback from political stakeholders. According to The Times of India, the Congress party has urged the Supreme Court to summon official commission records, arguing that the ECI's affidavit should be subject to further verification. Additionally, the News Mill reported that Congress MP Imran Masood has formally challenged the ECI’s claim of unanimity, highlighting a persistent gap between the government’s stated position and the claims made by the political opposition.
The Election Commission has maintained that its actions remain strictly within the bounds of administrative procedure. Regarding the reliance on secondary sources, Moneycontrol reported that the ECI cautioned the court against treating external newspaper accounts as primary evidence during the judicial process. As the Supreme Court continues to evaluate the case, the ECI remains firm in its stance that the allegations of unilateral moves are unfounded, emphasizing that the multi-member constitutional body continues to function as a consensus-driven entity.
