{
  "type": "article",
  "title": "Election Commission Cannot Refuse to Hear Citizens Missing From Draft Voter Roll, Bombay High Court Rules",
  "summary": "Hearing a petition on the Special Intensive Revision drive, the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court held that the Election Commission cannot shut out eligible voters merely because their names are missing from the draft electoral roll.",
  "content": "The Goa bench of the Bombay High Court has delivered a crucial observation regarding the Special Intensive Revision, known as SIR, of electoral rolls. The court noted that when an eligible citizen's name fails to appear in the draft voter list formulated during the SIR process, that individual can be pushed into a precarious situation. This is especially true if the Election Commission refuses to evaluate their grievances by referencing the existing voter list. The bench firmly stated that an eligible citizen cannot be excluded from the electoral rolls simply because their name is absent from the draft roll. If a person meets the legal requirements of an eligible voter, electoral authorities have a duty to hear their case.\n\nThe Petition Filed by the Salgaonkar Family\nThe matter was heard by a division bench comprising Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar. The proceedings arose from a writ petition filed by Paresh Salgaonkar and his family members from Goa. During the ongoing SIR exercise, the names of the petitioners were not included in the draft electoral rolls. During the hearing, the court underscored that if a voter receives a notice from the Election Commission and clarifies that they have relocated their residence and intend to submit Form-8, the commission cannot simply decline to hear them.\n\nThe judges emphasized that the election machinery cannot dismiss a citizen's plea by asserting that the existing system disallows it or by contending that hearing them is impossible because their name is not reflected in the draft roll. Procedural constraints cannot be used as an excuse to shut out legitimate voters from participating in the democratic framework.\n\nSection 21 of the Representation of the People Act\nThe division bench placed significant focus on the statutory framework, observing that the electoral roll referenced in Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act pertains to the existing operational roll, not merely the draft roll. The judges stated that the entirety of the revision exercise must be viewed against the backdrop of the existing voter list. If election authorities fail to adopt this approach, affected voters will be left without any viable, effective mechanism to voice their grievances or correct administrative errors.\n\nThe court pointed out the severe operational consequences of such omissions. If an individual's name is left out of the draft voter list, the practical fallout could be that the person is effectively knocked out of the existing operational list as well, stripping them of their active voting status without due recourse.\n\nResponsibilities of BLOs and Safeguarding Eligible Voters\nReferring to the official instructions governing the SIR exercise, the bench pointed out that beyond the duties assigned to Booth Level Officers, or BLOs, the primary imperative is ensuring that no eligible citizen is left disenfranchised. The fundamental objective embedded in the SIR directives is to ensure that the voter roll strictly contains eligible citizens. The bench questioned how election officials planned to remedy the situation if the revision exercise itself ends up removing legitimate voters from the list.\n\nAppearing on behalf of the Election Commission, advocate Gaurish Agni submitted that the commission's guidelines explicitly recognize the existing voter roll as remaining in force. He informed the court that whenever a citizen shifts from one assembly constituency to another, they have the option to apply via Form-8 to transfer their registration to the new constituency. Through this route, citizens can also secure the required modifications to their voter ID, or EPIC card.\n\nCourt Demands a Harmonious Reading of Guidelines\nDespite the assurances from the commission's counsel, the Bombay High Court reiterated that the procedures must be implemented in a manner that protects every eligible individual from arbitrary omission. The bench noted that all directives governing the SIR exercise must be read together harmoniously to fulfill their overarching goal: ensuring that no qualified voter is excluded. With arguments remaining inconclusive, the High Court directed that hearings in the matter will resume on Tuesday.\n\nWhat this means for you\nThe High Court's observations significantly strengthen the legal rights of citizens facing sudden exclusion during voter list revisions.\n\n• Across India: Electoral authorities across the country cannot summarily reject citizens whose names are omitted from draft rolls without affording them a fair hearing. This safeguards voters from bureaucratic lapses and technical errors during intensive revision drives.\n• In Goa: Residents who have recently changed their residential address can actively rely on their standing in the existing voter list to transfer their registration using Form-8. This prevents family members who relocated across constituencies from losing their voting franchise.\n• Voter ID Corrections: Citizens seeking updates to their EPIC card details or constituency records can initiate changes through standard forms without being disqualified by administrative technicalities. This ensures that relocation does not cause disenfranchisement.\n• Accountability of BLOs: Ground-level Booth Level Officers must exercise greater care to ensure that genuine voters are not omitted during door-to-door or revision exercises. Citizens now have clearer grounds to challenge wrongful exclusion by local election machinery.\n\nWhy this happened\nThe legal challenge arose when multiple eligible citizens in Goa found their names completely missing from the newly drafted electoral rolls under the Special Intensive Revision drive.\n\n• Direct Trigger: Paresh Salgaonkar and his family members filed a writ petition before the High Court after discovering that their names were omitted from the draft voter list during the SIR exercise.\n• Administrative Hurdles: Electoral authorities reportedly pointed to procedural constraints, suggesting that the system could not entertain representations once a name was missing from the draft roll.\n• Relocation Challenges: Voters shifting residential locations needed to submit Form-8 for constituency transfers, but being excluded from draft rolls left them without a clear mechanism to exercise this option.\n• Judicial Review: The High Court stepped in to interpret Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, ruling that the operational existing roll must remain the benchmark to prevent arbitrary disenfranchisement.\n\nQuestions & Answers\n\n1. What key observation did the Bombay High Court's Goa bench make regarding the Election Commission?\nThe court held that the Election Commission cannot refuse to hear an eligible voter merely because their name is missing from the draft voter list.\n\n2. Who filed the petition in the High Court and what was the grievance?\nParesh Salgaonkar and his family members filed the petition after their names were excluded from the draft electoral roll during the SIR exercise.\n\n3. What did the bench rule regarding Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act?\nThe bench clarified that Section 21 refers to the operational existing electoral roll, not exclusively to the provisional draft roll.\n\n4. How can a voter update their details after relocating their residence?\nAccording to the counsel for the Election Commission, citizens can submit Form-8 to transfer their voter registration to their new constituency and update their EPIC details.\n\n5. Which judges comprised the division bench hearing this case?\nThe case was heard by a division bench comprising Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar.",
  "url": "https://trendkia.com/en/national/draphta-votara-lista-se-nama-gayaba-hone-para-sunavai-se-mana-nahin-kara-sakata-election-commission-bombay-high-court-ka-sakhta-ru-43523",
  "category": "India",
  "publishedAt": "2026-10-05",
  "tags": [
    "Bombay High Court",
    "Election Commission",
    "Voter List",
    "SIR Revision",
    "Goa Bench",
    "Electoral Roll",
    "Form 8",
    "Representation of the People Act"
  ],
  "language": "en",
  "site": "TrendKia"
}