The Delhi High Court has closed proceedings in a petition concerning voters whose names were deleted from electoral rolls after they could not complete the enumeration process following a change of residence. The Court observed that their apprehension about making a false declaration while submitting Form 6 was misplaced, after the Election Commission of India offered to facilitate the application.
Background
The petition, Nilotpal Datta & Anr. v. Election Commission of India & Ors., challenged the procedure prescribed by the Election Commission for existing voters who could not be enumerated during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi.
The petitioners argued that they had shifted from their earlier residential address and, as a result, could not complete the enumeration process. Their names were subsequently deleted from the electoral rolls.
They approached the High Court seeking restoration of their electoral entries and permission to update their details through Form 8, which is used for corrections and shifting of residence, rather than applying for fresh inclusion through Form 6.
Appearing for the Election Commission of India, Standing Counsel Sanjay Vashishtha submitted that the petitioners could seek redressal by submitting Form 6 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
The counsel also informed the Court that the Electoral Registration Officer had offered assistance to petitioner No. 1 in completing the application. However, the petitioner, appearing in person, opposed the suggestion, expressing concern that submitting Form 6 could amount to making a false declaration.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Aditi Choudhary considered the submissions made by both sides. The Court noted that the suggestion to submit Form 6 had come from the Election Commission's counsel on the instructions of the Electoral Registration Officer.
The Bench observed:
“Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that when the suggestion is coming from the learned standing counsel appearing for ECI, that too as per the instructions of the Electoral Registration Officer, petitioner no.1’s apprehension that he would be accused of furnishing a false declaration is misplaced.”
The Court, therefore, did not accept the petitioner's apprehension that following the suggested procedure would expose him to an allegation of making a false declaration.
The High Court closed the writ proceedings while leaving the petitioners free to submit Form 6 if they wished to do so. It clarified that any such application would be processed in accordance with law.
The Court ordered:
“With these observations, the writ proceedings are closed. Petitioners, if so desire, may fill Form 6, which shall be processed in accordance with law.”
The Bench also disposed of the pending interlocutory applications.
