The Delhi High Court has ruled that booth-level agents appointed by political parties are not responsible for verifying all personal particulars submitted in voter enumeration forms, holding that such information remains exclusively within the personal knowledge of individual electors.
In an order issued on September 3, Justice Amit Bansal clarified that statutory house-to-house verification remains the official duty of Booth Level Officers (BLOs), not party representatives. The bench held that Booth Level Agents (BLAs) can only face liability under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act for information they can directly confirm, specifically whether an applicant’s identity matches the photograph attached to the form.
Court Limits Scope of Agent Undertakings
The court found that because statutory verification duties are assigned to BLOs, the Election Commission of India (ECI) lacked justification to compel party agents to sign personal undertakings certifying the accuracy of all submitted data.
Justice Bansal observed that party agents possess no practical means to verify comprehensive personal data provided by electors. The court also highlighted that BLAs perform no statutory function in the formal inclusion or exclusion of names from electoral rolls, making an exhaustive verification guarantee inappropriate.
Congress Challenge to Election Commission Directive
The legal challenge arose during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls across the capital. Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee President Devender Yadav and the chairman of the party’s Booth Management Committee approached the court after the poll panel mandated that BLAs furnish personal undertakings certifying all form particulars before submitting them to BLOs.
The petitioners had previously approached both the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, after which the apex court granted them permission to pursue the matter before the High Court.
Appearing for the Congress leadership, a legal team comprising Senior Advocate Sakal Bhushan and advocates Sunil Kumar, Vasu Bhushan, Prateek Kumar Sinha, and Nipun Bhushan argued that party workers cannot realistically verify an elector’s private background. The counsel contended that an agent’s confirmation should be restricted strictly to verifying the identity of the person tendering the form and ensuring the attached photograph corresponds to that individual.
Regulatory Background and Electoral Roll Access
Defending the requirement, Senior Counsel Dama Sheshadri Naidu, appearing for the ECI, argued that while political parties are under no obligation to name booth-level agents, those who take on the voluntary role must act with accountability. The commission described the personal undertaking requirement as a necessary measure of checks and balances.
The Special Intensive Revision in Delhi was scheduled through a circular dated May 14, following overarching revision guidelines issued by the commission on June 24, 2025.
In addition to challenging the verification declaration, the Congress petitioners had requested copies of the 2002 electoral rolls and the Frozen Colour Photo Electoral Roll to assist agents during the revision exercise. The election authority informed the court that the 2002 and 2025 voter lists are accessible and can be downloaded directly from its official website.
