The Election Commission has removed the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)-related declaration from the online version of Form 6 on its ECINET portal in states where the SIR process has concluded.

The change comes days after the poll panel said that the standard forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 would be used outside the SIR period. The latest move follows objections raised by two Election Commissioners over the inclusion of the additional declaration in Form 6.

What was the SIR declaration in Form 6?

Form 6 is used by eligible citizens to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll. The online version of the form had earlier included an additional declaration linked to the SIR exercise.

The section asked applicants to indicate whether their own name, or that of a parent or grandparent, appeared in the electoral roll during the previous SIR. According to earlier reporting, applicants could not proceed with the online application without responding to the question, even though the section itself was not marked as mandatory.

The statutory Form 6, however, had not itself been amended when the additional section was introduced on the ECINET portal.

Two Election Commissioners had objected

Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had raised objections to the change in Form 6.

According to internal records cited in the report, both commissioners had argued that statutory forms could not be changed without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. They had also called for the additional declaration to be removed.

The objections were part of a wider series of disagreements recorded by the two commissioners over various decisions connected with the SIR exercise and electoral-roll management.

Declaration removed where SIR has concluded

The latest change does not mean that the SIR-related provision has been removed everywhere. The report says the declaration has been taken off the online Form 6 in states where the SIR process has concluded, while the provision remains in states where the exercise is still underway.

The development follows an Election Commission meeting on September 26, when the poll panel said that forms prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules would apply outside the SIR period. The Commission also announced a review of the ECINET system to check its compliance with the relevant laws and rules.

The ECINET review committee is headed by a Senior Deputy Election Commissioner and includes an independent expert from an IIT or IIIT, according to the Commission’s announcement.

Wider questions over SIR process

The Form 6 issue is part of a broader debate over the Election Commission’s handling of the SIR exercise. The two Election Commissioners have formally recorded objections on multiple occasions, including over changes to voter-registration procedures and aspects of electoral-roll management.

The Election Commission, meanwhile, has said that its SIR-related decisions were taken unanimously and has announced several procedural and technology-related measures amid the controversy.

A discussion on the Opposition alliance and Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s political move led to a sharp exchange between senior Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Digvijaya Singh at the Congress Working Committee meeting.

During the meeting, Mr Digvijaya Singh raised the issue of Nitish Kumar and argued that the Congress and its allies should have been able to retain him within the Opposition alliance, according to people familiar with the discussion.

Sonia Gandhi responded firmly, saying that Nitish Kumar had “betrayed” the Opposition bloc and that it was better that he had left when he did.

The exchange came during a wider CWC discussion on the Congress’s political strategy and the recent electoral landscape.

Digvijaya Singh raises Nitish Kumar issue

Digvijaya Singh also argued in favour of restoring ballot papers in elections during the meeting, according to the account of the discussions. His remarks on Nitish Kumar were part of the internal deliberations on the Opposition’s political strategy.

The discussion reflected differing views within the Congress on how the party and its allies should have approached Nitish Kumar’s association with the Opposition bloc.

Sonia Gandhi’s response

Sonia Gandhi disagreed with the suggestion that the Opposition should have retained Nitish Kumar.

She said that Kumar had betrayed the Opposition bloc and indicated that his departure from the alliance was better for the Opposition than continuing with him, according to the report of the CWC proceedings.

The exchange took place during the Congress’s broader discussions on electoral issues and its political approach.

The BJP’s farmer outreach in Punjab’s Patiala has triggered a dispute with the Bharatiya Kisan Union (Shadipur), after the organisation rejected the party’s claim that its leaders had joined the BJP at an event.

The BJP had announced on Monday that around 100 to 150 leaders associated with farmer organisations had joined the party during its Nasha Mukti Yatra in Patiala Rural. The development was presented as part of the BJP’s efforts to connect with Punjab’s farming community ahead of the 2027 Assembly elections.

However, BKU (Shadipur) leader Buta Singh Shadipur said no one from the organisation had joined the BJP.

BKU Shadipur disputes BJP’s claim

Buta Singh Shadipur alleged that some people were brought from outside and presented as members of the farmer union. He also alleged that the organisation’s badge, name and logo were used during the programme.

The union is examining the event and has indicated that it could take legal action after reviewing the available material.

“Our legal advisers are with us. We are examining the videos and other material. Once the investigation is complete, we will consider sending legal notices to the people concerned,” Singh said.

He also said the use of the organisation’s identity could create an impression that BKU (Shadipur) had supported the BJP.

Singh stressed that individual participation in the BJP programme should not be interpreted as a decision taken by the farmer organisation.

BJP event participant defends decision

The BJP’s account of the event was supported by farmer Nirmal Singh, who defended his decision to join the party.

“Earlier, we opposed the BJP and said the BJP would not be allowed to enter Punjab. But after seeing all three major parties, people have now decided to support the BJP,” Nirmal Singh said.

He also criticised the AAP government in Punjab and said he believed the BJP could improve the situation in the state.

“The AAP has spoiled the atmosphere in Punjab. That is why we are joining the BJP. If any party can improve the situation in Punjab, we believe it is the BJP,” he said.

Union examines possible legal action

BKU (Shadipur) legal adviser Advocate Prabhjeet Singh said the alleged use of the organisation’s registered name and logo without permission was being examined.

He said the union was considering possible action under trademark law as well as defamation proceedings.

The dispute centres on whether the participation of individuals at the BJP event can be represented as an organisational decision by BKU (Shadipur). The union has maintained that individual participation should not be portrayed as an endorsement or decision by the organisation.

BJP steps up rural outreach in Punjab

The controversy comes as the BJP increases its outreach to rural and farming constituencies in Punjab ahead of the 2027 Assembly elections.

The party has sought to expand its political engagement beyond urban constituencies traditionally associated with its support base. Its outreach has included issues such as drugs, farmers’ welfare and rural development.

The Patiala episode has now added a dispute over the representation of a farmer organisation to the BJP’s efforts to engage with Punjab’s farming community.