Panaji, Oct 5 The Bombay High Court on Monday observed that voters excluded from the draft electoral roll under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) face a "catch-22" situation, emphasising that no eligible citizen should be left out of the voters' list.
The HC's Goa bench comprising Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit Jamsandekar made the observation while hearing a petition filed by Goa resident Paresh Salgaonkar and his family members, who were omitted from the electoral rolls during the ECI's SIR exercise.
The bench reiterated the Supreme Court's observations in its order on the issue of SIR that the Election Commission of India (ECI) was obligated to ensure that all Indian citizens are included in the final voter list.
The court said when an omitted voter receives a notice from the ECI and approaches officials stating they have relocated, they are asked to submit Form 8, used for shifting residence, correcting entries, or replacing an Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC).
However, the system then rejects their application on the grounds that their name is absent from the draft roll, the bench added.
"You cannot tell him, 'I will not hear you because the system does not allow you as you are not on the draft roll'," the court said.
If citizens are excluded then what will we do with your SIR? If citizens are being removed from the list then what is the purpose of this entire SIR process, it asked.
The judges clarified that Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act refers to the "existing" electoral roll, not the draft roll.
"Everything must be viewed in the context of the existing roll. Otherwise, the voter has absolutely no way out. It is a complete catch-22 situation," the bench said, adding that removing a voter's name from the draft roll effectively amounts to deleting them from the existing roll altogether.
The court further pointed out that while guidelines direct booth-level officers (BLOs) to verify eligibility, paragraph 5 of the SIR order explicitly mandates that no genuine citizen should be excluded.
"If citizens are being excluded through this process, how do we address this issue?" the bench asked.
Representing the ECI, Advocate Gaurish Agni argued that the existing roll technically remains in force and that voters shifting constituencies can apply for an EPIC transfer using Form 8.
Reiterating its stance, the bench held that procedural rules must comply with the overarching mandate and that is "If a voter is eligible, he or she must not be left out."
The court will resume hearing arguments on Tuesday.
As per the plea by Paresh Salgaonkar and his family, they had moved to a new house in the same Santa Cruz assembly constituency in North Goa district and were instructed by the Booth-Level Officer to submit Form 8 for a change of address.
At the time of processing, errors showed up no record of their EPICs was found, and as such, their Form 8 was rejected following which they moved the HC.
