TMC MP Dola Sen Alleges ECI Manipulation of Form-6 in Supreme Court

In a significant development, TMC MP Dola Sen has accused the Election Commission of India of manipulating Form-6 during a Supreme Court hearing. The allegations suggest that the ECI acknowledged tampering with the voter registration form in its affidavit. Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing Sen, contested the ECI's claims, raising concerns about the commission's operational methods. The court has granted ten days for the petitioners to respond to the ECI's statements, with the case set to be heard again shortly. This case highlights ongoing tensions regarding electoral integrity and the processes governing voter registration in India.

By Narendra Chaudhary Oct 27, 2026, 14:40 IST

Supreme Court Hearing on ECI Allegations

In New Delhi, Dola Sen, a Member of Parliament from the Trinamool Congress (TMC), raised serious allegations in the Supreme Court on Tuesday. She claimed that the Election Commission of India (ECI) acknowledged tampering with Form-6 in its affidavit submitted to the apex court. Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing Sen, informed the court that the ECI had issued a press release asserting that the Supreme Court had approved a revised Form-6 for voter registration. However, she contested this claim, stating that the court had not issued any such order.

Guruswamy further argued that if the court were to issue a notice in this matter, it could be heard alongside related pending petitions. She also pointed out that the ECI had accepted several allegations made in Dola Sen's petition in its response.

During the proceedings, Guruswamy questioned the ECI's operational methods, suggesting that the way the commission attempted to justify the alleged changes in Form-6 raised serious concerns. She noted that the ECI was arguing that the Supreme Court had permitted a Special Intensive Review (SIR) in Bihar, but the purpose of the forms used there was to gather information related to citizenship and caste, which was unrelated to Form-6.

The ECI, in its affidavit, stated that only the central government has the authority to amend Form-6. However, it also acknowledged that the manner in which the declaration forms were presented during the online application process could give the impression that changes had been made to the form. According to the ECI, this was done to simplify the online process and provide applicants with the convenience of completing the OTP and e-signing process in one go.

Senior advocate Maninder Singh, representing the ECI, raised objections to Guruswamy's arguments, stating that such statements against the commission were made for ulterior motives. The hearing was part of several petitions challenging alleged irregularities in the ECI's processes and the special intensive review of voter lists in various states.

Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohan presided over the case and granted the petitioners ten days to file their responses to the ECI's reply, postponing the hearing. The bench ordered that the case be listed again in ten days, by which time the responses should be submitted.

One of the petitions was filed by Rakesh Kumar Singh, challenging the unilateral decisions made by the Chief Election Commissioner and seeking a 'quo warranto' writ against him. Additionally, various political leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, have filed petitions regarding alleged irregularities in the ECI's operations.