The Karnataka High Court has extended its interim stay on the investigation against two Bengaluru residents accused in a case involving Form 7 applications seeking deletion of names from the electoral roll, while directing election authorities to preserve related electronic records.
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde’s single-judge bench reserved its order after hearing writ petitions filed by G.S. Vasanthalakshmi and R. Deepak Singh of Guttahalli. The petitioners have sought the cancellation of the first information report registered against them over allegations that incorrect information was submitted during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
During the hearing, Karnataka’s Advocate General K. Shashikiran Shetty alleged that around 99% of the Form 7 applications filed in the state targeted voters from minority communities. Form 7 is used to request deletion of a person’s name from the electoral roll. The Advocate General told the court that booth-level agents and booth-level officers had found the voters residing at their addresses during house-to-house visits conducted as part of the SIR process.
According to the state’s submissions, the applications were nevertheless filed with the intention of removing those voters from the electoral roll. The allegations were made during arguments in the petitions and have not been established by a final court finding.
The Advocate General also argued that an investigation was necessary to prevent the destruction of electronic records. He told the court that reports from the Election Commission and the police would be placed before the bench for examination. The state further submitted that a political party had allegedly acted in coordination with the Election Commission in the matter and that the purpose behind the alleged conduct needed to be investigated.
The state sought permission to continue the investigation, offering assurances that the petitioners would not be arrested and that a chargesheet would not be filed before the trial court without the High Court’s permission.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate M. Arun Shyam argued that election authorities could take action if incorrect information was found in a Form 7 application. He also pointed out that people whose names are removed from the electoral roll have a right to appeal, with a two-stage appeal mechanism available under the election process. On that basis, he argued that a police complaint was not necessary at this stage.
After hearing both sides, the court extended the earlier interim order staying the investigation against the petitioners. It directed electoral registration officers to preserve the electronic records connected with the Form 7 applications submitted by them and to transfer those records to investigating officers if necessary.
The court reserved its order on the petitions. The proceedings will determine whether the investigation can continue while the petitioners challenge the FIR, but the report supplied for the hearing does not indicate when the reserved order will be delivered.
