Goa

Goa Youth Congress staged a protest at Azad Maidan in Panaji against the Special Intiative Revision of electoral rolls. They targeted the BJP-led government and Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

AICC Goa in-charge Manikrao Thakare spoke strongly. He said BJP has won the last five elections, but that does not give it the right to decide who should vote. In his words, if a voter is removed, democracy is removed. I found his point hard to dismiss.

From the Streets to the Courts

"The BJP should fight elections with votes, not with deletions," Thakare said. He added that Congress will take this fight from the streets to the courts to protect every eligible voter.

Youth Congress president Archit Shantaram Naik called Gyanesh Kumar a puppet of Modi. Working president Sunil Kavthankar said the protest is about who gets to take part in our democracy. Aldona MLA Adv. Carlos Alvares Ferreira questioned the clarity of the SIR exercise. He raised concerns over 13.39 crore electors categorised under ASDD during the draft stage.

South Goa MP Capt. Viriato Fernandes called it a black day for democracy. He backed Rahul Gandhi's nationwide campaign against the SIR process. Congress leaders demand the CEC's resignation and warned they will push harder until every genuine voter is protected.

Bombay High Court has postponed the hearing of a Goa family's case. The family is challenging the removal of their names from voter rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

Goa Bench, with Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit Jamsandekar, pushed the matter to next Tuesday. The reason was that the Election Commission of India (ECI) argued the Supreme Court is already hearing petitions on the same issue.

ECI lawyer Gaurish Agni told the court that Supreme Court orders could affect this case. He pointed out that similar directions have come from the Sikkim, Uttarakhand, and Kerala High Courts.

The judges felt the Supreme Court's orders may not directly apply here. Still, the ECI asked for a week's delay. The Supreme Court is likely to hear the petitions on October 8.

Family's Names Removed From Voter List

The petitioners are Paresh Salgaonkar and his family from the St Cruz Assembly constituency. They are challenging the removal of their names from the voter list.

Their EPIC numbers were deleted, and their Form 8 applications could not be processed. After that, they were asked to submit Form 6 for fresh inclusion.

Last week, the Goa bench had questioned the Election Commission about removing names without giving voters a hearing. The bench said it was "very perturbed by this."

AAP national convenor Arvind Kejriwal has demanded the immediate resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. He says the whole country is now united in this demand against alleged 'Vote Chori'.

Speaking during his three-day visit to Goa, Kejriwal said the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive is being used to delete real voters and add fake ones. He argued this process has made a mockery of democracy and that elections are being won through it.

Election Commission responds to INDIA bloc protest

Earlier, Election Commission of India (ECI) issued a clarification about a protest by INDIA bloc leaders. The poll panel said no political party had asked for an appointment until 4 pm. This came after a delegation of about 240 MPs, led by Rahul Gandhi, marched towards Nirvachan Sadan. The ECI said the way the meeting was requested was unusual.

Paresh Salgaoncar from North Goa has gone to Bombay High Court at Goa to get his voting rights back. He says his name and five family members were removed from the voter list after they shifted house within the Santa Cruz assembly area eight years ago.

Salgaoncar is refusing to fill Form 6, which is for new voters. He says he is an existing voter and does not want to sign a false declaration on oath. The Election Commission has told the court that its software cannot restore a deleted entry, and Form 6 is the only option available.

The case, Paresh Salgaonkar vs State of Goa, is being heard by Justices Amit Jamsandekar and Valmiki Menezes. The judges have asked why Form 8, used for address changes, should be rejected at all. They also questioned why an existing voter should have to sign up as a new one. The bench raised a concern too. Many real voters could get stuck with no form that fits their situation.

This case has taken on bigger meaning because of worries about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) going on right now. In Goa, the SIR started in November 2025 with 11,85,034 electors. It ended with a final roll of 10,57,566, a drop of 1,27,468 or 10.76 per cent. Separately, 97 voters that officers had confirmed as eligible were left out of the final roll. The software could not undo an earlier deletion. They were told to apply on Form 6, and most have been added back.

Salgaoncar says he has nothing against anyone. He only wants his name put back on the list as an eligible voter. He is also worried about the next SIR, since it compares voters against the roll from 2002.

Read more: Bombay HC raps EC for rejecting Form 8 | Software cannot override law in voter deletion: HC

Bombay High Court has raised concerns over the deletion of voters from electoral rolls linked to changes in Goa addresses.

Address updates during rolls refreshes may end up removing eligible voters from the list by mistake. That directly hits voting rights. Every voter should keep an eye on their electoral roll entry to stay registered.

What You Can Do

Goa residents who think their name has been removed should check their details on the ECI voter services portal as soon as possible. Quick verification can help catch any wrongful deletion early.

Goa: Bombay high court, sitting in Goa, has ruled that the draft electoral roll prepared under the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) cannot be used to delete a voter's name without following the proper legal process.

The case was about six members of a family, led by Paresh Salgaonkar. Their names were removed from the roll after they moved to a new house in the same Santa Cruz assembly constituency. They had filed Form 8 to update their address, as their booth level officer told them to. Once the application was processed, officials found that their EPIC details were missing from the ERONET system. The only option left on screen, they said, was to reject.

Justice Amit S Jamsandekar and Justice Valmiki Menezes said they were "very perturbed" by this. A software glitch should not decide who gets to vote.

The bench asked Election Commission of India to show the legal provision that allows deletion without a hearing. "Show us from the Act, what empowers you to delete without hearing?" the judges asked. They also rejected the advice given to the family to file Form 6 for fresh inclusion, since they were existing voters who only wanted a change of address. "Otherwise, Form 6, 7 or 8 have no meaning," the court observed.

Pointing out that this was just one family, the bench warned of wider problems ahead. "He was never a new voter. He became new for your system," the court said, and asked what happens to the many people who shift residence every year.

The judges noted that officers appeared helpless and simply blamed the system, which could defeat ECI's own goal of keeping an accurate electoral roll. The matter is listed for further hearing till October 5.

Bombay High Court's Goa bench has said citizens can question why the Election Commission of India ordered a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) after 24 years. The court was hearing a petition filed by Paresh Salgaonkar and five family members whose names were deleted from the voter list in Santa Cruz assembly constituency.

The family had moved to a new house in the same constituency. They submitted Form 8 for an address change, but it was rejected because no record of their EPIC was found. The bench, made up of Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit S Jamsandekar, said ECI's action did not match its main job of making sure citizens can cast their votes.

The court pointed out that discrepancies would not come up if electoral rolls were updated regularly. It also questioned ECI's authority to delete names without giving electors a hearing. Such technical rejections could take lakhs of legitimate voters off the rolls. The judges said Form 8 applications should be kept pending during SIR instead of being rejected outright.

The next hearing is set for October 5.

Bombay High Court has raised serious concerns over how Election Commission handled voter list revisions in Goa. During the Special Intensive Revision, a family from Santa Cruz Assembly constituency found their names missing from the draft electoral roll. They had already submitted Form 8 to update their address.

ECI said its software did not allow Form 8 processing at that stage of the revision. The family was then told to apply afresh using Form 6. This raises a basic question. Why should a voter who already followed the correct process be forced to start over?

Software limits cannot overrule the law

The court was blunt in its observations. It pointed out that authorities appeared to be giving a "go by" to the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Statutory powers of Electoral Registration Officers, the judges noted, cannot be subordinated to software limits.

Over 1.18 million electors were covered in Goa's SIR exercise. Many names were not carried forward. Reasons included death, permanent migration, absence, or duplication. EC has since said it will review its ECINET platform and allow field officials more flexibility.

These were oral observations during the hearing. They do not count as a final finding against Election Commission. Court has not declared Goa SIR exercise illegal at this stage.

Bombay High Court's Goa bench has ruled that the draft roll prepared under Special Intensive Revision (SIR) cannot be used to delete names from the voter list. The court said clearly that software systems cannot override the law.

Justice Amit S Jamsandekar and Justice Valmiki Menezes were hearing a petition from six members of a family whose names were removed from the voter list in Santa Cruz assembly constituency. The family had moved to a new house in the same constituency and asked their BLO to change their address through Form 8.

Here is where things went wrong. The ERONET software had no record of their EPICs, and the only option left was to reject the application. The Assistant Electoral Registration Officer told them their EPICs had already been deleted from the rolls, so they had no choice but to apply under Form 6, which is only for first-time voters.

The court was blunt. "Otherwise, Form 6, 7 or 8 have no meaning," the bench said. It added that these forms exist for new voters, those who have lost the right to vote, or those who are shifting residence.

ECI questioned on deletion without hearing

The judges also questioned ECI on what part of the law allows deleting names without giving the voter a hearing. "Show us from the Act, what empowers you to delete without hearing?" they asked, calling the situation deeply troubling.

The scale of this problem is worrying. The bench pointed out that only one family came to court, but lakhs of citizens who have shifted residence could face the same fate. Once a Form 8 is received, the authority must check whether the person has genuinely moved. It cannot simply push the decision onto a software system.

Source: PTI

Bombay High Court has strongly criticised the Election Commission's SIR (Special Electoral Revision) process. The court said the panel was basically telling voters to follow software instead of the law.

The case involved six members of a family from Santa Cruz, Goa. Their names were deleted from voter rolls during the SIR even though they had filled Form 8 to change their address within the same constituency.

Justices Valmiki Menezes and Amit Jamsandekar called the SIR process disturbing. They questioned how the system allowed names to be removed without giving voters a chance to be heard first. The judges pointed out that the ERO had no say and was just following commands from ERONET software.

Advocate Gaurish Agni, representing EC, told the court that the system did not allow Form 8 to be processed during SIR. The bench said this meant the Representation of People Act and Registration of Electors Rules were being ignored.

What the court ordered

The court told the concerned electoral registration officer to appear in court. It stressed that the Act must be followed instead of technology. No voter should be left out.

Bombay High Court has told the Election Commission to decide on the registration of the proposed Goa Congress Party by November 30. The court also asked Goa's Chief Electoral Officer to finish checking affidavits from 20 supporting persons by October 9.

Why the party name is being disputed

Congress leader Girish Chodankar has raised objections to the proposed party name. He says it could confuse voters because it sounds too similar to "Goa Congress". Applicant Francisco Gouveia filed the registration application in June this year.

The court asked why the decision was taking so long. It pointed out that the Goa Assembly's term ends in March 2027, and a new party needs enough time to set up before elections. EC counsel Gaurish Agni told the court that documents were incomplete until the end of August. He also said the Commission gets around 500 party registration applications every year.

Once the checking is done, the CEO will send a report to the Election Commission. After that, the EC will hear both Gouveia and Chodankar before making a final decision by November 30.

Goa Congress MLA and advocate Carlos Alvares Ferreira has called Election Commission of India's latest measures an "admission of guilt" rather than a proper explanation of the issues raised against it.

Ferreira, who represents Aldona, was reacting to decisions announced after the ECI's Full Commission meeting held on September 26. He said the Commission failed to address serious concerns about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercises conducted so far.

Questions on the house-to-house visit process

He questioned the new house-to-house visit process for voters who received notices over unmapped records. Under this system, officials will collect documents from such voters and upload them on ECINET for the Electoral Registration Officer to consider. "Why was this exercise not done during the Goa SIR?" Ferreira asked. He pointed out that voters in Goa were instead made to appear at Mamlatdar offices. That discouraged many from pursuing their claims.

Ferreira also alleged that the exercise shifted from being inclusive to exclusive. He claimed people from particular religious communities and localities were affected the most. He raised concerns about deletion of names from electoral rolls. Losing an election card, he argued, could affect access to government services and benefits.

Concerns over voter forms

On voter forms, he questioned ECI's decision to revert to the earlier Form 6 during non-SIR periods. He argued the older form was prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. He also alleged the current form had been introduced without proper legislative approval. "By this they admit that they changed the forms unilaterally and without the required legislative authorization," he said.

ECI has announced a review committee headed by a Senior Deputy Election Commissioner. The committee includes an independent expert from an IIT or IIIT. It will review ECINET and check whether the system complies with relevant Acts and Rules.

Demands for accountability

Ferreira also criticised the Commission's internal working. He alleged Full Commission meetings were held without agendas shared in advance. He called for accountability at the top. He demanded that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar should resign. He also asked that the other two Election Commissioners be held responsible for their failure to act earlier.