The Election Commission has told the Supreme Court that voters whose names are missing from the draft electoral rolls despite being enrolled earlier can apply afresh through Form 6 without facing prosecution, provided they are not already registered in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency.In an affidavit filed before the apex court in connection with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi, the poll panel clarified that merely filing Form 6 after a voter's name is left out during the SIR will not invite prosecution under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.The EC said it had received representations about apprehensions that people who were enrolled in previous electoral rolls but whose names did not appear in the draft rolls during the SIR could face prosecution for submitting Form 6 again." In order to allay such misapprehensions, the Commission ... has clarified that no prosecution will be launched against anyone for filing Form 6 merely on the ground that the applicant/elector was previously enrolled in the electoral roll(s) prior to the SIR and their name did not appear in the draft electoral roll during the SIR, provided that applicant/elector is not already enrolled in any other Parliamentary or Assembly Constituency and the declaration made is otherwise in accordance with law," the affidavit said. The poll panel added that Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) had been asked to publicise the clarification widely, including in local languages, to ensure voters are aware of the provision.EC ISSUES FRESH DIRECTIONS TO FACILITATE VOTER ENROLMENTThe Election Commission also informed the Supreme Court that it had taken note of the court's suggestion to reach out to voters left out under the ASDD (Absent, Shifted, Dead, or Duplicate) category and facilitate their inclusion in the electoral rolls.

The commission said it had decided to introduce further measures in the interest of voters and issued directions to Chief Electoral Officers in states and Union Territories where the SIR exercise is underway through a communication dated November 6, 2026.Under the directions, voters can submit a duly filled Enumeration Form (Annexure A) to the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO), Assistant Electoral Registration Officer (AERO) or Booth Level Officer (BLO) for their current ordinary residence.Electors who have not shifted from their previous addresses can submit a signed Enumeration Form (Annexure A), along with an Annexure-B statement explaining why they could not submit the form earlier.The documents can be submitted in person to the ERO, AERO or BLO, or through family members. An online submission facility with e-sign will also be available on ECINET.The EC said it had directed the authorities to establish a mechanism to ensure that no eligible elector is deprived of the opportunity to have their name included in the final electoral roll, subject to the prescribed eligibility conditions.

At the same time, the mechanism would ensure that duplicate enrolments are avoided.'COMMITTED TO ENSURING ELIGIBLE VOTERS REMAIN ON ROLLS'In its affidavit, the commission reiterated its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the electoral process while ensuring that eligible voters are not left out of the electoral rolls."The Commission remains committed to its constitutional duty of ensuring the purity of the election process. There are challenges on count of the large numbers involved, and also because the full data is digitalised," it said.The poll panel acknowledged that difficulties could arise during the exercise but said it remained attentive to the need to ensure that eligible voters find their names on the electoral rolls while addressing inconsistencies in the lists.The EC also said booth-wise lists of deleted voters, along with the reasons for their non-inclusion, were being displayed.EC HAD EARLIER DEFENDED SIR EXERCISE BEFORE SUPREME COURTThe latest affidavit comes after the Election Commission strongly defended its Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls before the Supreme Court, maintaining that the exercise was authorised by law and that the relevant orders had been approved unanimously by all three members of the commission.The poll panel had also rejected allegations that Form 6 was amended.

In its response to a petition challenging the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and decisions taken by the commission, the EC maintained that no changes had been made to the statutory Form 6 used for voter registration.- Ends