Bombay HC slams ECI over deletion of 6 voters despite Form 8
text_fields
New Delhi: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday criticised the Election Commission of India (ECI) over the deletion of the names of six members of a family from the electoral rolls in Goa’s Santa Cruz constituency despite their submission of Form 8 to notify authorities of a change of address during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).
Petitioner Paresh Salgaonkar told a division bench that he and his family had shifted to another residence within the same constituency and had submitted Form 8 to inform the authorities about the change. However, they later discovered that their names had been removed from the electoral rolls.
The ECI told the court that its software did not allow Form 8 applications to be processed during the enumeration phase of the SIR. The family was subsequently asked to submit Form 6, which is used for the inclusion of new voters, but they refused, the commission said.
The bench questioned why the Form 8 applications had not been considered even though they were submitted within the stipulated period. The judges also objected to the requirement that the family submit Form 6 when it had only sought to update its address.
“That’s a problem with your software. Can you imagine what will happen, how many voters you will lose out like this? How can you insist on someone filling a Form 6? Why is Form 8 there, then?” the bench asked.
The ECI’s counsel argued that the petitioner and his family had shifted residences around eight years ago and should have informed the authorities about the change of address earlier. The bench, however, dismissed the argument, pointing out that Salgaonkar had submitted Form 8 precisely for that purpose.
The court also criticised the ECI’s explanation that the issue had arisen because of the software, warning that such a limitation could potentially result in the disenfranchisement of voters. The judges questioned why a process that had existed before the introduction of electronic systems could not be handled when the software failed to accommodate it.
“Since when has 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,” the bench observed.
“This is a mistake on your [ECI’s] part,” the court said.
During an earlier hearing last month, the High Court had asked the ECI which form the petitioner needed to submit to ensure that his family’s names remained on the electoral rolls. The commission had said that its system did not allow a name to be restored once it had been deleted.
The bench had then directed the ECI to find a solution to the issue. On Tuesday, the court reiterated that the matter required a swift response, noting that the problem was being faced across the country.
