In an affidavit, the poll panel admitted that displaying the declaration alongside Form 6 on its online portal could create the impression that the statutory form had been modified. It said the two documents were separated in the online application process from October 21.
The EC explained that the declaration was earlier displayed alongside Form 6 to allow applicants to complete both steps using a single OTP and electronic signature. It maintained that only the central government has the authority to amend Form 6 under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
The affidavit was filed in response to a petition by Rakesh Kumar Singh challenging the changes and raising concerns about the functioning of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The separate SIR declaration required applicants to state whether their own name or that of a parent or grandparent appeared in an earlier electoral roll. Critics argued that this requirement could create difficulties for first-time voters whose families were absent from older rolls.
The issue had earlier reached the Supreme Court on October 5, when Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the court had not approved a modified version of Form 6 and sought to examine the records behind the changes.
The EC also rejected allegations that Gyanesh Kumar had taken SIR-related decisions unilaterally. It said all three major SIR orders, issued on June 24, 2025, October 27, 2025, and May 14, 2026, were approved unanimously by the three Election Commissioners.
The affidavit further stated that the commission’s decision-making process involves routing files among its members, with electronic approvals used in urgent cases.
The dispute comes amid wider disagreements over SIR procedures and the allocation of responsibilities within the Election Commission. The EC said a work-allocation order issued on July 28 was never implemented after a joint direction from the two other Election Commissioners on July 30.