Back
Congress moves against BJP candidate over age discrepancy in
The has admitted a petition filed by the challenging the election of ’s Nandigram bypoll candidate Hasirani Rath, alleging that the sworn details regarding her age and educational qualification are self-contradictory and “practically impossible.” The matter is scheduled for hearing on Thursday before a single bench of Justice Krishna Rao.
The Congress, represented by leader and advocate , argued that Rath’s states she is over 60 years old and that she passed the Madhyamik (Class X) examination in . However, the same lists her year of birth as —meaning she would have taken the exam before she was born. “How could she pass the secondary examination before she was born?” Ghosal questioned before the court, urging that the candidature be cancelled if the information is found to be false.
Justice Krishna Rao asked the petitioner what relief was sought. Ghosal replied that cancellation of the nomination was the only appropriate remedy if the alleged discrepancy is proven. He further submitted that the had scrutinised the but failed to act on the apparent inconsistency. The court has posted the matter for hearing on Thursday, ahead of the bypoll.
Background of the Nandigram bypoll
Nandigram has long been a politically charged constituency in Purba Medinipur district. In the Assembly elections, Chief Minister Shubhendu Adhikari, then a BJP candidate, defeated Mamata Banerjee from the same seat. Adhikari later vacated Nandigram after also winning Bhabanipur, necessitating the current bypoll. The by-election is scheduled for , with counting on . The BJP fielded Hasirani Rath, mother of Chandranath Rath—a former personal assistant to Adhikari who was shot dead in May this year.
The Congress’s challenge comes after the party lodged a complaint with the Election Commission on Tuesday, demanding an impartial inquiry. State Congress president Subhankar Sarkar accused the poll panel of inaction despite what he termed “serious discrepancies” in the .
The specific allegations
The Congress’s petition highlights two main discrepancies. First, the states that Rath’s year of birth is , yet claims she passed the Madhyamik examination in —a . Second, the school mentioned in the —Chowkhali Ganga Padma Milan Kanya Vidyapith—allegedly did not have government recognition for Class X in . According to the Congress, the school was established in 1963 and only offered education up to Class V initially, receiving approval for Class X only in .
The Congress argues that these inconsistencies render the unreliable and warrant under the Representation of the People Act, which mandates accurate disclosure of information by candidates. Ghosal emphasised that cancellation would not disrupt the bypoll as other candidates remain in the fray.
BJP’s response
The BJP has dismissed the allegations as a “false negative campaign” and an “unsuccessful attempt” by the Congress to gain political mileage. Party representatives claimed there is no age problem with Rath. They asserted that she was a Class X student in , not , and attributed the discrepancy to a “” in the . Rath’s election office maintained that she passed the matriculation examination from the same school under the Madhyamik system and that she was born in —not . Rath herself stated she has full faith in the law and will accept the court’s decision.
Legal implications
The case raises important questions about the scrutiny of election affidavits by the Election Commission. Under , candidates must furnish true and correct information about their criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications. The Commission has guidelines for scrutiny of nominations, but this instance highlights potential gaps in the verification process.
If the court finds the to contain false information, it could set a precedent for stricter enforcement of disclosure requirements. The ’s decision may also influence how other high courts handle similar petitions, particularly when the alleged discrepancy appears impossible. Legal experts note that while typographical errors are common, a claim of passing an exam before birth cannot be dismissed as a mere mistake.
Impact on electoral practice
For practising lawyers and election law specialists, this case underscores the importance of careful drafting and verification of affidavits. It also raises the question of whether the Election Commission should adopt a more proactive approach in cross-checking basic biographical details before accepting nominations. The outcome could lead to a demand for digitised school records that are easily verifiable by election authorities.
The Congress’s move also demonstrates how political parties can use judicial avenues to challenge opponents’ candidatures, even on seemingly straightforward factual errors. However, the lies on the petitioner to establish that the information is not only incorrect but also deliberately false.
Conclusion
The ’s hearing on Thursday will be closely watched by legal and political observers alike. If the court accepts the Congress’s argument, it may order cancellation of Hasirani Rath’s candidature, reshaping the electoral landscape in Nandigram. Conversely, if the court finds the discrepancy to be a , it could still direct the Election Commission to issue clarifications or impose a penalty. Regardless, the case serves as a reminder that election affidavits are not mere formalities—they are sworn documents with legal consequences.
