What is the current controversy around Form 7? | Explained Premium

Explore the controversy surrounding Form 7, including allegations of misuse and the impact on voter deletions in India.

The story so far: In the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR), bulk applications are being filed for the deletion of names from the draft electoral rolls. On January 29, the Congress, in a letter to the Election Commission of India (EC), alleged that the form was being misused through “systemic and coordinated efforts” to delete names of eligible voters and embolden BJP’s efforts to wrongfully gain electoral advantage. The Hindu’s reporting from Rajasthan and Gujarat also found individuals who said they had not submitted the Form 7 applications purportedly signed by them. 

Form 7 is used for objecting to the inclusion of another person’s or one’s own name on the electoral roll on specific grounds such as death, duplication or shifting of residence. It can also be used to object to voters who are ineligible due to age, citizenship or misrepresentation. As per Section 13(2) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, framed under the Representation of the People Act, 1950, “every objection to the inclusion of a name in the roll shall be (a) in Form 7 and (b) preferred only by a person whose name is already included in that roll”. Booth Level Agents (BLAs) can also file objections. Earlier, only persons from the same booth/station were allowed to file an objection but in 2022, the EC amended Form 7 to allow any voter in a constituency to object, widening its ambit. However, to prevent misuse, the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) is required to mandatorily verify all claims if an individual files more than five objections.

Once a Form 7 application is received, Booth Level Officers (BLO) are required to conduct physical verification of the voter’s address and eligibility. In cases of death, verification involves confirmation signatures by three neighbours and a death certificate. If the voter is found absent, the BLO must make three physical visits to confirm whether the person has shifted. The concerned voter is then issued a notice for a hearing. Appeals against the ERO’s decision can be made to the district magistrate within 15 days of publication of the updated list.

According to the EC, more than 50.94 crore enumeration forms have been distributed since the launch of Phase II of the SIR, covering 99.94% of the nearly 51 crore voters included in this phase. The SIR is currently underway in Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Puducherry, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, and Lakshadweep. The revision follows a tight schedule, and against this compressed timeline, the scale of objections and deletions sought through Form 7 has raised concerns about procedural fairness and administrative capacity. According to the draft electoral rolls published by the EC, the names of 6.5 crore electors were removed from the draft rolls of nine States and three Union Territories (UTs) as part of the ongoing SIR. Before the revision, these States and UTs had 51 crore voters; after publication of the draft rolls, the number fell to 44.4 crore. EC officials said those removed were placed in the ‘ASD’ category — Absent, Shifted and Dead/Duplicate. The highest deletions were reported from Uttar Pradesh (2.89 crore), followed by Tamil Nadu (97 lakh), and Gujarat (74 lakh).

At the heart of the controversy is the bulk submission of Form 7 applications by anonymous or fraudulent actors seeking mass deletion of voters from electoral rolls in the ongoing SIR. Filing a false declaration is a punishable offence under Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, attracting imprisonment of up to one year or a fine or both. Critics argue that ‘if remained unchecked this will lead to the disenfranchisement of lakhs of voters, especially those belonging to the backward, marginalised communities’.

Saee Pande is a freelance writer.