The political battle over the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has intensified after the Supreme Court clarified that it had not approved any modified version of Form 6, prompting a fresh confrontation between the poll panel and the Congress.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, while hearing a plea seeking the suspension and prosecution of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, said the court had not approved any modified Form 6 and indicated that it would examine how the form was changed.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi subsequently accused Kumar of changing Form 6 "illegally and unilaterally" and alleged that the move was aimed at helping the BJP.

The Election Commission, however, rejected the allegation as misleading. It said the order initiating the SIR in Bihar on June 24, 2025, was issued with the unanimous approval of the Commission and had been upheld by the Supreme Court in its May 27, 2026 judgment.

The ECI also pointed to its September 26 press note, which said the declaration attached to Form 6 for the SIR had been upheld by the Supreme Court.

What did the Supreme Court say about Form 6?

The court's observation came during a hearing on a petition that sought action against CEC Gyanesh Kumar over allegations that important decisions concerning the SIR were taken without the approval of the full Commission.

"Any modified Form 6 has not been approved by us. Let's be clear," CJI Surya Kant said during the hearing, adding that the court wanted to see who had made the modification once the relevant records were produced.

The controversy centres on an additional declaration in the online version of Form 6. Under the new requirement, applicants have to state whether they or their parents were mapped in the previous SIR.

The petitioners have argued that such a change could not be made without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

The Supreme Court, however, did not grant an immediate request to suspend Gyanesh Kumar. The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notices to the Centre, the ECI, Kumar, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and DG (IT) Seema Khanna.

The bench said the allegations and records would first need to be examined before any such relief could be considered.

BJP accuses Rahul Gandhi of misleading people

The BJP also hit back at the Congress.

Party national spokesperson Sambit Patra accused Rahul Gandhi of misleading the public, arguing that the Supreme Court had not declared Form 6 illegal.

Patra said the court had only taken note of the petitioner's contention that Form 6 had been modified and had indicated that it would examine the issue.

The exchange has turned the court hearing into another flashpoint in the wider political battle over the ECI's handling of the SIR exercise.

INDIA bloc to march to Election Commission

Despite the ECI's clarification, Opposition parties are moving ahead with a fresh protest.

INDIA bloc MPs are scheduled to march from Parliament House to the Election Commission's office at 11 am on October 6. Congress MP Jairam Ramesh said Opposition MPs would assemble at Makar Dwar at 10.30 am before beginning the march.

Ramesh said the INDIA alliance would continue its campaign beyond the Parliament march, with district-level pad-yatras, demonstrations and meetings planned until October 8.

The Aam Aadmi Party, however, said it would not participate in the march. AAP MP Sanjay Singh said the party was not part of the protest being organised by the INDIA alliance but would continue to pursue the issue separately.

Congress general secretary KC Venugopal has also announced a nationwide "Vote Bachao, Desh Bachao" campaign from October 10.

Venugopal said the campaign would continue until Gyanesh Kumar was removed and changes were made to the system.

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has meanwhile listed three demands as "non-negotiable": the resignation of Gyanesh Kumar, cancellation of the SIR and a return to ballot papers.

What is behind the wider dispute over the ECI?

The confrontation goes beyond the Form 6 controversy.

The petition before the Supreme Court relies on a report alleging that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi raised objections at least 14 times between October 2025 and August 2026 over decisions and procedures connected to the SIR and other electoral matters.

The reported objections covered issues including Form 6, voter deletions, electoral-roll databases and changes to electoral systems.

The petitioners have argued that the ECI, as a multi-member constitutional body, cannot have its powers exercised unilaterally by the CEC. They have cited Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which provides for the Commission's business to be handled unanimously as far as possible and, where members differ, decided by majority.

The petition also raises allegations over communications being issued in the ECI's name without Commission approval, delays in circulating meeting agendas and minutes, and changes to electoral-roll systems without the participation or approval of the other commissioners.

The ECI, however, has rejected the suggestion that the reported objections amounted to institutional dissent over final decisions, saying operational queries, suggestions and inputs during the drafting process are part of its regular administrative and decision-making process.

The Supreme Court has so far stopped short of granting the petitioners' request to suspend the CEC, stressing that the allegations must first be examined on the basis of authenticated records.

"If there is any violation, we will undo," CJI Kant said during the hearing.

With ANI inputs