The Election Commission of India, facing heat amid alleged dissent row, fact-checked Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi on Monday after he alleged that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar changed the Form 6 “illegally and unilaterally”.
Gandhi shared a press note issued by the ECI, dated Sept 26, 2026, and highlighted a section that read, "The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. For non-SIR period, the Forms applicable as per rules (the Registration of Electoral Rules 1960) will be used".
Sharing the note, Gandhi wrote on X, “It is now established beyond doubt that Gyanesh Kumar changed Form 6 illegally and unilaterally. This is just one more proof of him abusing his position to help the BJP. He and everyone else involved in this criminal assault on our democracy will be held accountable.”
Deep Dive
What are the main allegations against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar regarding Form 6?
Why did the Supreme Court state that any modified Form 6 has not been approved?
How did the Election Commission of India respond to Rahul Gandhi's claims about Form 6 changes?
Gandhi's post came after the Supreme Court on Monday clarified that it had not approved any modification to Form 6, the statutory application used by citizens to register as voters, as it issued notice on a plea challenging alleged changes made to the form on the Election Commission’s ECINet/ERONet portal.
“Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let’s be clear. When record will be produced, we would like to see who has modified,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said during a hearing on Monday.
{{/usCountry}}“Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let’s be clear. When record will be produced, we would like to see who has modified,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said during a hearing on Monday.
{{/usCountry}}The petition was heard by a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana and was filed by advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi, who has questioned changes allegedly made to the online Form 6, particularly the addition of details about an applicant’s ancestry and declarations linked to the last special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
ECI's clarification
Responding to Gandhi's claim, the ECI “fact-checked” him and said that the statement made in his post is “misleading” and gave two arguments to support their claim.
First, that “the order for SIR in Bihar issued on 24 June 2025 was issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission. This order has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 27 May 2026”.
And second, that “in its Press Note No. 120 dated 26 September 2026, in Point 1(iii), ECI has stated that, “The declaration attached to Form 6 for SIR has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court”.”
However, the Commission's reply left unanswered the key question raised by Gandhi about whether the modified Form 6 now in use was brought into effect by the Chief Election Commissioner without the required approval. The Supreme Court took up the issue during Monday's proceedings.
What is the Form 6 controversy?
Form 6 is the statutory application used by a person seeking inclusion of their name in the electoral roll. The controversy relates to an additional declaration that was introduced in the online version of the form during the ongoing SIR exercise.
The online version of Form 6 was modified in July to include a new section requiring applicants to declare whether their own name, or that of a parent or grandparent, appeared in the electoral roll prepared during the previous SIR. Applicants were required to answer the declaration before they could complete the online application.