Goa Court to EC: Why Delete Citizens, Then Make Them Sign a ‘False’ Form 6?

Six voters in North Goa say a routine address change inside the same assembly constituency cost them the vote. Paresh Salgaonkar and five family members had shifted house years earlier. A booth-level officer told them to file Form 8. The online window was shut, the form did not go through, and their names came off the old roll without landing on the new one. The Election Commission’s answer, as the family tells it: file Form 6, the form for a new voter, and declare they had never been registered before. They refused. That declaration, they argue, would be a lie, and a false statement on an electoral form can invite prosecution. On 6 October the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court asked the Commission the obvious question: if Special Intensive Revision is meant to revise the roll, why are existing citizens being removed and then told to enrol as if they had never voted? The bench treated “people” as citizens, not infiltrators, and pointed to the rule that a name on the existing roll should not be deleted without a hearing. It was not impressed by the technical reply that there was nothing left to transfer once the draft entry was gone. This is not an isolated glitch. It sits next to earlier court unease over how Form 6 and SIR are being used. Full background is in the earlier Double Check video. What the judges said, and what it means for anyone whose name has vanished, is in this one. #DoubleCheck #GyaneshKumar #ElectionCommission #SIR #VoterRoll #GoaHighCourt #Form6 #Form8 #BombayHighCourt #VoteChori #IndianElections #ElectoralRolls #CEC #PareshSalgaonkar #VoterRights #News #CurrentAffairs