'Mistake on Your Part': Bombay HC Slams ECI Over SIR Deletion of Six Who Had Filed Form 8
New Delhi: The Bombay high court on Tuesday (September 29) slammed the the Election Commission of India (ECI) over the deletion of six members of a family from the electoral rolls in Goa's Santa Cruz constituency, despite submitting form 8 to update their address during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).
Paresh Salgoankar, the petitioner, told a division bench that his family had shifted to another residence within the same constituency and had submitted form 8 to notify the authorities of the same. However, the family later discovered that its names had been removed from the voter rolls.
The ECI then informed the court that its software did not permit form 8 applications to be processed during the enumeration phase of the SIR, reported Times of India. The bench reprimanded the ECI in this regard, questioning why the applications had not been taken into consideration even though they had been submitted within the stipulated period.
The judges also objected to the requirement for the family to submit form 6, used for inclusion of new voters, when the family had only sought to update its address.
Warning the ECI of the potential disenfranchisement of numerous voters because of such a limitation, the court said, "That is a problem with your software. Can you imagine what will happen, how many voters will lose out like this? How can you insist on someone filling a form 6? Why is form 8 there, then?"
The ECI's counsel argued that the petition and his family has moved residences around eight years earlier and should have informed the authorities of the change in address. The bench dismissed this argument, saying that the petitioner had filed form 8 for that very purpose.
It also criticised the explanation that the issue arose from the software, describing it as a shortfall on the ECI's part. Per the TOI report, the court observed, "Since when has been this form 8 been in existence? Go back to the pre-electronic age. How would you do it?…Now, because you have software, this issue has arisen. You can't overwrite the software."
"This is a mistake on your [ECI's] part," the court asserted.
During an earlier hearing last month, the high court had asked the ECI about which form the petitioner needed to submit to keep the family's names of the voter rolls. The commission had replied that the system they used did not permit a name to be restored once it had been deleted.
The bench had then directed the ECI to find a solution to the issue. The court, on Tuesday, reiterated that the problem needed a swift response, noting that the issue was being faced across the nation.
For our full coverage on the SIR and the issues it has brought to citizens, click here.
This article went live on September thirtieth, two thousand twenty six, at fifty-three minutes past two in the afternoon.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
