Stories
Bombay HC Grills ECI Over Rejected Voter Forms, Cites Risk to Eligible Voters
N
News18•02-10-2026, 09:20
Bombay HC Grills ECI Over Rejected Voter Forms, Cites Risk to Eligible Voters
- •The Bombay High Court's Goa bench questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) on rejecting Form 8 applications during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, fearing eligible voters might be excluded.
- •The court heard a petition from a family whose names were deleted from the voters' list after moving within the Santa Cruz constituency, despite submitting Form 8 as instructed.
- •Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit S Jamsandekar questioned why Form 8 applications were rejected instead of being kept pending, emphasizing the ECI's goal should be to include as many eligible voters as possible.
- •ECI counsel Gaurish Agni argued the commission has the power to reject forms during SIR if not submitted during the enumeration period, suggesting voters could use Form 6 if left out.
- •The bench stressed that the Representation of the People Act's objective is to ensure eligible citizens can vote, questioning if rejecting an incorrect form is better than keeping it pending to prevent voters from being removed from the rolls.
Key Questions Answered
The Bombay High Court questioned the Election Commission of India over the rejection of Form 8 applications during the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, noting that such actions could cause eligible voters to be left off the list and lose their voting rights.
The ECI counsel argued that the commission possessed the authority to reject the forms, noting that the enumeration form served as the basis during the Special Intensive Revision and that the petitioners had failed to submit their applications during the required enumeration period.
The ECI stated that if a person was left out during the Special Intensive Revision, they could submit Form 6 to the commission, which would then be duly considered.
