Supreme Court seeks ECI response to plea challenging Maharashtra SIR, declines interim relief

The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from the Election Commission of India (ECI) on a petition challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Maharashtra, amid allegations that nearly three crore voters had been excluded from the draft list.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, however, declined to grant interim relief without hearing the poll panel. It refused to extend the deadline for filing claims and objections or restrain the ECI from publishing the final electoral roll.

The court scheduled the next hearing for November 5.

Petitioner flags deletion of three crore voters

Senior advocate Arvind P Datar, appearing for petitioner Arun Anandagiri, told the bench that nearly 33% of Maharashtra's nine crore voters, amounting to around three crore people, had been excluded after the draft electoral rolls were published. Of these, 1.22 crore voters were allegedly deleted over what the ECI classified as “logical discrepancy”.

Datar argued that the affected voters were being asked to submit Form 6 to register their names again, despite having voted previously. He maintained that the form was intended for first-time voters and that existing electors whose names had been removed should not be required to apply through the same process.

He urged the court to direct the ECI not to finalise the electoral roll, arguing that Maharashtra did not have any immediate election that required the list to be published urgently. He said restoring the names of around three crore voters would take time.

“In Pune and Bombay, 40% voters are not there,” Datar submitted.

He said redevelopment projects had led to the relocation of many voters in Pune and Mumbai, but several had been deleted from the rolls under the category “person not found”.

Form 6 declaration raises concern over false statements

Datar argued that requiring previously registered voters to submit Form 6 could create a legal problem because applicants must declare that they are applying for inclusion in the electoral roll for the first time.

He warned that an existing voter whose name had been deleted could face the risk of making a false declaration by submitting the form.

Referring to a recent Delhi High Court order stating that deleted voters would not be prosecuted for filing Form 6, Datar said the assurance did not resolve the underlying issue.

“Delhi High Court says, don't worry, they will not take prosecution. But that is not an answer,” he told the bench.

The Chief Justice responded, “Nobody will be prosecuted.”

Datar nevertheless argued that the ECI should introduce a separate form for voters whose names had been removed during the SIR, rather than asking them to register as new electors.

Court declines to extend deadline without hearing ECI

The petitioner also sought an extension of the deadline for filing claims and objections, which was due to expire on Monday, and asked the court to defer publication of the final electoral roll.

The bench expressed reluctance to issue such directions without first hearing the ECI. Chief Justice Surya Kant noted that the court had extended deadlines in connection with SIR exercises conducted in other states.

The ECI's revised schedule has since set October 26 as the deadline for claims and objections in Maharashtra, with the final electoral roll scheduled for publication on November 16. The petitioner had referred to November 6 as the date for finalisation during the hearing.

The Supreme Court's notice seeks the poll panel's response to the challenge, but the bench did not grant the immediate relief sought by the petitioner.