Published Oct 11, 2026 | 10:16 AM ⚊ Updated Oct 11, 2026 | 10:16 AM
Karnataka High Court. (Wikmedia)
Synopsis: The Karnataka High Court has stayed two FIRs registered against two BJP booth-level agents for filing bulk Form 7 applications allegedly seeking to delete the names of eligible minority voters from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision in Bengaluru’s Malleshwaram Assembly constituency. The petitioners contended before the High Court that the alleged offences relating to Form 7 were non-cognisable and bailable, and that the police could not investigate them without an order from a Magistrate.
The Karnataka High Court has stayed two FIRs registered against BJP booth-level agents G S Vasanthalakshmi and Deepak Singh R for filing bulk Form 7 applications with the Election Commission allegedly seeking to delete the names of eligible minority voters from electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bengaluru’s Malleshwaram Assembly constituency, LiveLaw reported.
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde granted interim relief on Saturday, 10 October, on two separate writ petitions filed on Friday. The FIRs were registered by Vyalikaval and Yeshwanthpura police stations in Bengaluru following complaints by a Congress leader who contested the 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly election from Malleshwaram.
According to the complaints, Vasanthalakshmi filed Form 7 objections concerning 778 voters across eight polling booths, while Deepak Singh R filed objections concerning 136 voters at Booth 68.
The complaints alleged that the agents sought to have voters’ names deleted by falsely claiming they were “absent” or “permanently shifted”. The FIRs also alleged that signatures on several forms differed, raising suspicion of forgery to furnish false information through the applications.
Also Read: Karnataka SIR: Voters still at home despite Form 7 claims they had ‘permanently shifted’
The petitioners contended before the High Court that the alleged offences relating to Form 7 were non-cognisable and bailable, and that the police could not investigate them without an order from a Magistrate under Section 174(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
They argued that Section 22 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, read with Rule 13(2) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, permits any person whose name is already on the electoral roll to object, through Form 7, to the inclusion of another name.
Neither the Act, the Rules nor the booklet issued for the SIR sets a limit on the number of objections a person or a Booth Level Agent may file, the petitioners contended.
They further argued that if irregularities were found in the applications, action should be initiated under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act through the concerned Election Commission officer, rather than by the police.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
