Court restricts Booth Level Agents' liability to photograph verification only; directs Election Commission to provide physical electoral rolls with photographs to political parties
The Delhi High Court has delivered a significant judgment limiting the scope of responsibilities imposed on Booth Level Agents (BLAs) during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the National Capital Territory. Justice Amit Bansal held that requiring BLAs to furnish personal undertakings certifying the correctness of all particulars in Enumeration Forms is "arbitrary and unreasonable" and violates the principle of proportionate accountability.
The writ petition, filed by Devender Yadav, President of Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee, and another, challenged the Guidelines for Special Intensive Revision issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) dated June 24, 2025, particularly Clause 9(d)(iv) which mandated BLAs to submit undertakings confirming the accuracy of all details in Enumeration Forms. The petitioners argued that such a requirement was beyond the reasonable scope of BLAs' duties.
Background and Contentious Issues
BLAs are voluntary representatives appointed by recognized political parties to assist and complement Booth Level Officers (BLOs) during the electoral roll revision process. The ECI introduced this system in November 2008 to enhance participation by political parties at the grassroots level and dispel any impression of partisan exclusion of their supporters.
The controversy centered on a requirement compelling BLAs to undertake personal verification and provide written declarations certifying that all particulars in submitted Enumeration Forms were correct. This undertaking was framed under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which makes individuals liable for false declarations in connection with electoral roll preparation or revision, with punishment extending to one year imprisonment or fine or both.
Court's Key Findings
Justice Bansal made several critical observations distinguishing between different categories of forms and the appropriate scope of BLA liability:
1. Limited Verification Capacity: The Court noted that Enumeration Forms contain information exclusively within the knowledge of individual electors—such as date of birth, Aadhaar number, parent's name, spouse's details, and other personal particulars. A BLA, being a political party representative at the booth level, has no practical means to verify such personal details.
2. BLO's Primary Responsibility: The judgment emphasized that statutory verification responsibility rests solely with BLOs, who are government officers. The Enumeration Form itself contains a specific undertaking to be provided by the BLO: "I have verified the above details from the electoral roll(s) of the last SIR." Clauses 3(g) and 4(b) of the modified Guidelines dated May 27, 2026, further reinforce that BLOs are responsible for verifying documents during house-to-house enumeration.
3. Distinguishing Form Categories: The Court differentiated between two types of submissions by BLAs:
Forms with BLA Verification Responsibility (Annexure 58 and 59): Lists of dead voters and shifted electors prepared by BLAs through personal field verification. For these forms, BLAs can reasonably provide undertakings as they have personally conducted the verification.
Enumeration Forms: General application forms submitted by individual electors containing personal information beyond BLA's verification capacity.
4. Permissible Scope of BLA Accountability: The Court held that BLAs can legitimately be held responsible only for verifying that "the photograph on the Enumeration Form matches with the identity of the elector whose Form it is." This limited scope represents the practical verification BLAs can actually perform.
Statutory and Procedural Analysis
The Court acknowledged the ECI's wide procedural latitude under Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act read with Article 324 of the Constitution. However, the exercise of such powers must remain within reasonable bounds and cannot impose unrealistic or arbitrary obligations.
While Section 31 of the RP Act was amended to extend liability to third persons furnishing false information, this provision must be applied proportionately. The undertaking requirement, according to the Court, should correspond to the actual verification capacity and responsibility of the person giving the undertaking.
Electoral Roll Access Directive
The Court also addressed the second prayer regarding supply of electoral rolls. The ECI's position that online versions of electoral rolls do not include photographs proved significant. Justice Bansal directed that the Election Commission must provide physical copies of electoral rolls containing photographs of electors upon written request and payment of requisite fees. This enabling direction ensures BLAs can effectively assist in the SIR process with access to necessary reference materials.
Implications and Significance
This judgment has several far-reaching implications:
1. Reduced Administrative Burden: BLAs need not provide undertakings for information beyond their verification capacity, reducing unnecessary legal exposure for political party workers engaged in the democratic process.
2. Clarified Accountability Framework: The ruling establishes a clear hierarchy of responsibility—BLOs for statutory verification, BLAs for limited photograph and identity verification, and electors for truthfulness of personal information.
3. Balancing Act: While reducing BLA liability, the judgment maintains accountability mechanisms through BLO undertakings and potential Section 31 prosecutions for knowingly false information by electors themselves.
4. Institutional Efficiency: By defining reasonable boundaries, the judgment enables more efficient BLA participation without exposing them to disproportionate penal liability under Section 31 of the RP Act.
The Court's approach reflects a nuanced understanding that while accountability is essential in electoral processes, such accountability must be calibrated to the actual capacity and responsibility of the person bearing it.
Bottom Line:
Electoral Roll Revision - Booth Level Agents (BLAs) cannot be compelled to undertake verification of details in Enumeration Forms as they are not in a position to verify all the information provided by electors. Their liability under Section 31 of the Representation of People Act, 1950 is limited to verifying the photograph and identity of the elector.
Statutory Provision(s):
Section 21(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1950; Section 31 of the Representation of People Act, 1950; Article 324 of the Constitution of India; Registration of Electors Rules, 1960
Devender Yadav v. Election Commission of India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2972292
