Chidambaram: CJI's Form 6 clarification proves CEC approved modification
Synopsis
The INDIA bloc's march to the Election Commission headquarters in New Delhi on Tuesday crystallised a constitutional flashpoint: Congress leader P. Chidambaram invoked CJI Surya Kant's own words to argue that an 'addition' to Form 6 is a 'modification' — and therefore unauthorised — while Karti Chidambaram alleged 7,000 voter deletions by BJP workers in Karnataka through Form 7. The demand: CEC Gyanesh Kumar's resignation.
Key Takeaways
INDIA bloc MPs marched to the ECI headquarters on 6 October , demanding the resignation of CEC Gyanesh Kumar .
Chidambaram cited CJI Surya Kant's open-court statement that the Supreme Court had not approved any modification to Form 6 .
Karti Chidambaram called the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise 'unconstitutional and ultra vires', alleging unilateral decisions by the CEC.
New Form 6 question asking whether parents were voters has been challenged as violating the fundamental right to vote.
Congress alleged BJP workers filed 7,000 Form 7 applications to delete voters in Karnataka , calling it 'a complete abuse of the process.'
Senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram on Tuesday, 6 October declared that Chief Justice of India Surya Kant had unambiguously stated in open court that the Supreme Court had not approved any modification to Form 6 — the document used for inclusion of names in electoral rolls — directly contradicting the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) position on the matter. His remarks came as INDIA bloc MPs marched from Parliament to the Election Commission of India (ECI) headquarters in New Delhi, waving Tricolours and carrying banners reading 'Save Democracy', demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar.
What CJI Surya Kant Said
The CJI's clarification had come a day earlier, while the Supreme Court was hearing a petition seeking the prosecution of CEC Kumar. Justice Surya Kant stated that the court had not approved any modified version of Form 6 during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise. Chidambaram cited this ruling as definitive proof that the declaration added to Form 6 constitutes an unauthorised change.
'The BJP cannot read Hindi or English. The CJI clearly denied approving any modifications to Form 6. He said that once, and that is being broadcast several times,' Chidambaram told reporters. He pressed the point further, arguing that an addition to a form is, by any reasonable reading, a modification. 'He said this is an open court... How can the BJP blatantly deny this? The CJI clearly said that we do not approve Form 6. I have seen the declaration. The declaration is indeed a modification and addition to Form 6. Addition also means modification,' he said.
Congress MP Karti Chidambaram on SIR Exercise
Congress MP Karti Chidambaram went further, calling the entire SIR exercise 'unconstitutional and ultra vires.' He alleged that decisions within the Election Commission had been taken unilaterally by the CEC, in violation of the requirement that rulings be made unanimously or by majority among all three Election Commissioners. 'This entire SIR exercise is unconstitutional and ultra vires. Decisions in the Election Commission have to be taken either unanimously by all three Election Commissioners or by a majority. It appears that the Chief Election Commissioner has been taking decisions unilaterally,' he said.
He further alleged that the redesigned Form 6 was engineered to keep voters off rolls rather than add them. 'The entire SIR exercise has been engineered to exclude voters, not to include them. Form 6 has been changed. The questions asked in Form 6 are ultra vires,' he said.
The Parental Voter Question Controversy
A particular point of contention raised by Karti Chidambaram is a new question in Form 6 that asks whether an applicant's parents were registered voters. He argued this requirement has no constitutional basis. 'Your right to vote is not dependent on whether your parents were voters or not. As long as you are an Indian citizen, are above 18 years of age and are a resident of a constituency, you have the right to vote. This is a fundamental right, and that is being denied,' he said.
Alleged Misuse of Form 7 in Karnataka
The opposition also raised concerns about the alleged misuse of Form 7, which is designed exclusively for deletion of names in cases where voters have died or relocated. Karti Chidambaram alleged that in one incident in Karnataka, BJP workers had filed 7,000 applications through Form 7 to delete voters. 'It is not meant for mass deletion by political activists. It has been brought to light that in one incident in Karnataka, BJP workers filed 7,000 applications through Form 7 to delete voters. This is a complete abuse of the process,' he said.
What the Opposition Wants Next
The INDIA bloc has framed the SIR controversy not merely as a partisan dispute but as a constitutional crisis. Karti Chidambaram pointed to judicial concern as validation: 'Even the conscience of the judiciary is now stirred, which is why notices have been issued. Former judges and sitting judges are raising concerns. So, this is not a political or partisan issue, but an issue concerning the people.' The bloc's immediate demand remains the resignation of CEC Gyanesh Kumar. How the Election Commission responds — and whether the Supreme Court takes further cognisance — will determine the trajectory of this confrontation in the weeks ahead.
Point of View
Chidambaram has turned a procedural dispute into a constitutional one, making it harder for the BJP to dismiss as political noise. The real question mainstream coverage is sidestepping is whether the SIR exercise's design — with its parental-voter question and the alleged mass Form 7 deletions — passes basic constitutional scrutiny on voter rights. If the Supreme Court takes cognisance further, the ECI's autonomy narrative faces its most serious stress test in years. The demand for the CEC's resignation, however, is unlikely to succeed without court intervention or a coalition majority in Parliament.
NationPress
6 Oct 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Form 6 controversy involving the Election Commission?
Form 6 is used for inclusion of names in electoral rolls. The controversy centres on allegations that the Election Commission modified Form 6 during its Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise without Supreme Court approval, adding new questions — including whether an applicant's parents were voters — that opposition parties argue are unconstitutional.
What did CJI Surya Kant say about Form 6?
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant stated in open court, while hearing a petition seeking prosecution of CEC Gyanesh Kumar, that the Supreme Court had not approved any modified version of Form 6 for the SIR exercise. Congress leader P. Chidambaram has cited this as proof that the changes made to Form 6 were unauthorised.
Why is the INDIA bloc demanding CEC Gyanesh Kumar's resignation?
The INDIA bloc alleges that CEC Gyanesh Kumar has been taking decisions on the SIR exercise unilaterally, without the required unanimity or majority among all three Election Commissioners. The bloc also alleges that Form 6 and Form 7 have been misused to exclude voters rather than include them.
What is the allegation about Form 7 and Karnataka?
Congress MP Karti Chidambaram alleged that in one incident in Karnataka, BJP workers filed 7,000 applications through Form 7 — which is meant for deletion of names of deceased or relocated voters — to delete voters en masse. He called it 'a complete abuse of the process.'
What happens next in the Form 6 legal dispute?
The Supreme Court has already issued notices in a petition seeking prosecution of CEC Gyanesh Kumar. Further hearings will determine whether the court expands its scrutiny of the SIR exercise. The INDIA bloc's political campaign, including Tuesday's march to the ECI headquarters, is likely to continue pending judicial direction.
