Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
Sarfaraz, S/o Pashu Qureshi – Appellant
Versus
Returning Officer For Municipal Corporation General – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The petitioner, Sarfaraz, challenged the order dated 31st December, 2025, passed by the Returning Officer, which rejected his nomination form due to issues with the affidavits supporting the nomination (!) (!) .
The primary reason for rejection was that the affidavit submitted with the nomination form did not contain the petitioner’s signature (!) .
The petitioner filed a second affidavit on 29th December, 2025, on a non-judicial stamp paper, claiming it supported his nomination (!) (!) .
Upon review, the court observed that the first affidavit was defective because it lacked a signature, date, month, and year, and the notarization raised questions about its validity, as the notary's stamp was affixed without the petitioner’s signature and with blank spaces (!) .
The second affidavit also appeared defective because, despite the petitioner’s signature, it contained overwriting on the date, with conflicting dates on the notary stamps (26th December, 2025, and 29th December, 2025), and the notary's stamp was blank, raising doubts about its authenticity (!) .
The court noted that the affidavits were fundamentally flawed and could not be considered valid support for the nomination (!) (!) .
The court declined to grant interim relief and indicated that the matter requires further investigation regarding the affidavits’ authenticity (!) (!) .
The court also granted permission to add the State Election Commission as a party to the proceedings (!) .
Please let me know if you need a more detailed analysis or specific legal advice related to this case.
JUDGMENT :
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
1. Leave to add the State Election Commission as a party Respondent. Addition be carried out forthwith.
2. The Petitioner is before this Court challenging the order dated 31st December, 2025 passed by the Returning Officer, by which the nomination form was rejected on the ground that the affidavit supporting the nomination form did not carry the signature of the Petitioner candidate, as submitted before the Returning Officer.
3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has vehemently canvassed that though the affidavit filed along with the nomination form before the last date for filing, did not carry the signature of the Petitioner, the Petitioner had filed another affidavit on 29th December, 2025 on a Rs. 100/- Indian non-judicial stamp paper.
4. I have perused both the affidavits. The first affidavit, which is stated to be in support of the nomination form, cannot be termed as an affidavit from any angle. The date, month, and year are left blank. A stamp is affixed by Adv. Sudat G. Wahulkar, Notary, Government of India, District Aurangabad. It is a matter requiring investigation as to how the Notary could affix the stamp certifying that the Petitioner
Proper signatures are essential on affidavits supporting election nominations; deficiencies in documentation can lead to rejection.
The absence of signatures on the declaration in nomination forms is a substantial defect that cannot be trivialized as a mere formality.
The failure to rectify substantial defects in a nomination paper justifies its rejection under the Representation of People Act, 1951.
The nomination was rightly rejected due to substantial defects which could not be corrected post-deadline, validating the Returning Officer’s actions.
The defect in the nomination form was of a substantial character that could not be rectified at a later date, and reliance on an interim order from a similar case was unsustainable due to factual dis....
Free and fair elections are the very foundation of democratic institutions and just as it is said that justice must not only be done but must also seem to be done, similarly elections should not only....
The court emphasized the limited scope of interference by courts in electoral matters relating to Municipal Elections and highlighted the requirements for a valid nomination paper under the Punjab St....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timing of court intervention in the election process, the fulfillment of essential qualifications by candidates, and the availability of r....
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
