On October 5, 2026, the Supreme Court of India clarified that it did not authorize changes made to Form 6, a document used for voter registration during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. These modifications, which required new voters to provide information linking them to previous registrations, were implemented unilaterally by the Election Commission of India (ECI). During hearings on petitions seeking the suspension of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, the court emphasized that any changes to Form 6 must follow formal legislative procedures rather than administrative decisions. The justices also discussed the legal immunity granted to the CEC and Election Commissioners under the 2023 Act, noting that this protection extends beyond their tenure but does not apply to judges. Senior advocate Vikas Singh argued that the CEC’s elevated status could undermine democratic principles, though the court cautioned against disrupting election processes.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Supreme Court's clarification regarding changes to Form 6 and discusses legal debates around the CEC's immunity. It includes perspectives from both the court and petitioners without overtly favoring one side. The language remains neutral, focusing on legal arguments and the






