Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
Rajendra Dhedya Gavit – Applicant
In the matter between :
Sudhir Brijendra Jain - Petitioner
Versus
Rajendra Dhedya Gavit – Respondent
Interim Application (L.) No. 5808 Of 2025 In Election Petition No. 3 Of 2025 With Election Petition No. 3 Of 2025
Decided On : 23-06-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to election based on alleged misrepresentation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments for dismissal of election petition due to lack of cause of action. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. counters to arguments supporting election challenge. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court considers rival contentions. (Para 15) |
| 5. explanation of election act provisions and necessity of material facts. (Para 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. judicial precedent on election petitions and strict compliance. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 7. grounds for declaring an election void. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 8. arguments on the validity of nomination forms. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 9. allegations of misconduct and their implications under the law. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 10. legality and implications of noncompliance with election rules. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 11. need for causal link in election disputes. (Para 35 , 36) |
| 12. evaluation of legal grounds for alleging corrupt practices. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 13. court’s analysis of evidence and arguments presented. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 14. final rejection of the election petition. (Para 46) |
| 15. order resulting from the court's decision. (Para 47) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1) This application is filed by the original Respondent in the Election Petition seeking rejection of the Election Petition under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Code).
2) The Petitioner has filed the Election Petition seeking a declaration that the election of the Respondent in the General Election 2024 to the State Assembly from 130-Palghar-ST Assembly Constituency is void.
3) Brief facts leading to filing of the Election Petition are that Petitioner is a voter from 130-Palghar, ST Assembly Constituency who claims himself to be a Social Activist. Respondent contested the election from Assembly Constituency (130-Palghar) as an official candidate of Shiv Sena, a registered political party. The results of the elections were declared on 23 November 2024 in which Respondent was declared as the Elected Candidate.
4) The Petitioner has raised objections about declarations made by the Respondent in the Affidavit in Form-26 filed alongwith the nomination by the Respondent. It is contended that Respondent stated name of Smt. Rupali Gavit as his second wife (Spouse No. 2). According to the Petitioner, such disclosure by the Respondent is not only incorrect but also against the format of Form No.26 prescribed under Rule 4A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (the Election Rules). It is contended that the second marriage of Respondent with Smt. Rupali Gavit is void under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and therefore the declaration made by the Respondent about Smt. Rupali Gavit as his second wife is false. Additionally, it is contended that in the format of Form No.26 under Rule 4A, there is no provision for making any declaration of second spouse and that therefore addition of an extra column in respect of Spouse No.2 by the Respondent is in violation of Rule 4A of the Election Rules. The Petitioner has accordingly challenged the election of Respondent under the provisions of Section 100(1)(b), 100(1)(d)(i) and 100(1)(d)(iv) read with Section 123(4) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (the Act).
5) This Court issued summons to the Respondent by order dated 15 January 2025. After service of summons, Respondent has appeared in the Election Petition and has filed his Written Statement. Additionally, Respondent has filed the present application seeking rejection of the Election Petition under the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of the Code. Petitioner has filed Affidavit-in-Reply opposing the application. The application is called out for hearing.
6) Mr. Gangal, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant/original Respondent submits that the Election Petition does not disclose any cause of action for questioning the election of the Respondent. That when averments of the Election Petition are read as a who
Election petitions must contain concise statements of material facts and particulars to maintain challenges against election results; mere alterations for honest disclosure do not invalidate nominati....
Election petitions must plead concise material facts under Section 83(1)(a) RP Act to disclose cause of action; deficient, vague pleadings warrant dismissal under Order VII Rule 11 CPC without trial.
Important Point :Election petitions must contain concise statements of material facts and particulars of corrupt practices; failure to comply results in dismissal.
Election petitions must provide a concise statement of material facts; omissions lead to dismissal under statutory provisions when they do not substantiate a cause of action.
Election petitions must contain concise statements of material facts; omission of a single material fact leads to dismissal for lack of cause of action.
An election petition must contain concise material facts and particulars as per the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951; failure to do so results in dismissal.
Point of Law : In the event of a necessary party not being made a party to the Election Petition, it would be incumbent upon the Court to dismiss the petition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
