An application has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) requirement that voters excluded from Delhi's draft electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) must declare themselves as first-time applicants to secure restoration of their names.

The application has been moved by RTI activist Anjali Bhardwaj and another petitioner in their pending petition against the Election Commission.

They have sought directions to provide a separate mechanism for restoring the names of previously enrolled voters.

The petitioners have pointed out that 47,56,722 electors, constituting 32.78% of Delhi's electorate before the SIR, were excluded from the draft electoral rolls published on August 31.

Of these, 31,59,213 were classified as permanently shifted.

According to the application, these voters must submit Form 6 to seek re-inclusion, although the form requires applicants to declare that they are seeking enrolment for the first time.

The petitioners argue that this places previously enrolled voters in an untenable position, particularly because Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 makes knowingly false declarations punishable with imprisonment extending to one year, a fine, or both.

"An elector whose name was previously included in the electoral roll cannot, therefore, reasonably be required to make a declaration that he/she is seeking enrolment for the first time as a pre-condition to seeking restoration of his/her name," the application states.

The petitioners have also challenged the additional declaration prescribed under the SIR instructions, arguing that it imposes substantive requirements beyond statutory Form 6 without following the procedure prescribed under Section 28 of the Act.

They contend that the additional declaration was neither notified in the official gazette nor placed before the parliament.

The application further highlights that between August 31 and October 4, only 569 Form 6 applications were disposed of, compared with 3,209 Form 7 applications concerning objections to inclusion or deletion.

The petitioners have sought directions for a legally appropriate mechanism to restore excluded voters' names without requiring first-time enrolment declarations.

They have also urged the Court to declare the additional SIR declaration unenforceable and prevent rejection of otherwise maintainable claims solely because applicants have not submitted it.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan is representing the petitioners.