Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Monday criticised Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar following the Supreme Court’s observations on the modified Form 6 used for voter registration during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
Gandhi alleged that the form had been changed without proper approval and questioned the manner in which the Election Commission handled the matter. He also referred to an earlier statement by the poll panel claiming that the Form 6 declaration used during the SIR had been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Earlier on Monday, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Election Commission and the Centre on petitions questioning whether certain decisions of the three-member poll panel were taken without the approval of the other Election Commissioners.
The court clarified that it had not approved the changes to Form 6 and sought relevant records to examine how the modified form came into use. It also indicated that decisions found to be contrary to law could be set aside. However, the court declined to issue an interim order preventing the CEC from taking decisions pending the final hearing.
The Election Commission had earlier maintained that the declaration attached to Form 6 for the SIR had been upheld by the Supreme Court, while stating that the forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, would continue to apply outside the SIR period.
Following the Supreme Court’s observations, Congress leaders renewed their criticism of the Election Commission and the SIR exercise.
Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra alleged that the deletion of voters through the SIR raised concerns about constitutional and electoral safeguards. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh also said the developments provided an opportunity for the Supreme Court to address concerns regarding public confidence in the Election Commission.
The Congress, through its official social media account, also called for action against the Chief Election Commissioner.
The Election Commission has maintained that its procedures follow the applicable legal framework and that institutional discussions and differing views are part of its normal functioning.