NPP MPs, Adom-Otchere ask Supreme Court to strike down parts of Tribunals Act
The plaintiffs say Act 1181 intrudes on judicial power and the Chief Justice's authority; the Attorney-General has 14 days to answer once served.
Prashant Bhushan, an advocate, expressed concern on November 4, 2026, that the Election Commission of India (ECI) continues to require voters excluded from the electoral rolls post the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) to fill out Form 6, designed solely for new registrants. The ECI's insistence on this form, Bhushan argued, forces existing voters removed from the rolls to falsely represent themselves as new applicants, a violation of law which carries penalties.
On October 28, the Supreme Court explicitly stated the ECI's actions were "in error," ordering the commission to allow previously excluded voters to utilize Form 8/enumeration form instead. Petitioners Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, represented by Bhushan, Cheryl D’souza and Neha Rathi, had pointed out that the ECI was forcing voters to misstate their status, a punishable offense.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) indicated the case would be heard following Deepavali holidays, amidst ongoing Supreme Court proceedings. Bhushan cautioned that voters may face prosecution if they declare themselves new voters on Form 6. The CJI assured the petitioners that the protection granted during incumbency does not extend post-retirement, as interpreted by the court.
Written by urgent.news from The Hindu's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
This story
This is one outlet's version. Read the fullest account.
