New Delhi [India]. September 10 : The Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea challenging the Election Commission of India’s requirement that certain electors affected by the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) submit declarations stating that they are applying for inclusion in the electoral roll for the first time.
The plea was filed by Devender Yadav, President of the Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee (DPCC), along with Rajesh Kumar Garg, Chairman of the DPCC Booth Management Committee. Justice Amit Bansal asked the petitioners to pursue the grievance by filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). Following the court’s direction, the petition was withdrawn.
The petition sought partial quashing of Para (iii) of Form 6, insofar as it requires electors whose names had previously existed in the electoral roll but were deleted during pre-SIR or are being deleted during SIR to declare that they are applying for inclusion in the electoral roll for the first time.
The petitioners also challenged Para (ii) of the accompanying Declaration Form, which requires certain affected electors to declare that their names are not included in any Assembly or Parliamentary Constituency.
They sought directions to the Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer, Delhi, to modify the two declarations and provide a truthful and accurate declaration mechanism for electors falling within the affected categories. 
The plea further sought a direction that no elector who has filed or files Form 6 following deletion of their name during pre-SIR/SIR should be proceeded against or prosecuted under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, on the basis of the disputed declarations in their present form. 
According to the petition, the issue concerns electors whose names had already existed in the electoral rolls but were deleted during the pre-SIR exercise or were being deleted during the ongoing SIR. The petitioners claimed that some electors were told by Booth Level Officers that their names had been deleted because they were absent or had shifted residence.
The petitioners argued that requiring such persons to declare themselves as first-time applicants would amount to asking them to make a declaration that is factually incorrect.
They also raised the issue of potential criminal liability, pointing out that Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act provides punishment for making a false statement or declaration in connection with the preparation, revision, or correction of an electoral roll. 
The plea relied on the ECI’s own FAQs on SIR, which state that a person whose name does not appear in the draft electoral roll may file Form 6 during the claims and objections period along with the prescribed declaration and supporting documents.
The petition specifically stated that the challenge was not directed against the SIR exercise as a whole, but against the disputed declarations insofar as they apply to previously enrolled electors affected by deletion during the pre-SIR/SIR process.
The petitioners had also filed an interim application seeking an ex parte ad interim stay on the operation and enforcement of the disputed declarations pending disposal of the writ petition.
With the High Court refusing to entertain the writ petition in its present form and directing the petitioners to approach the court through a PIL, the petition was withdrawn.