Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Bom) 118

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Milind N. Jadhav, J.
In The Matter of : Sunil (Bhau) Chandrakant Bhusara - Petitioner
Versus
Harishchandra Sakharam Bhoye and Ors. - Respondents
Application (L) No.9497 of 2025 In Election Petition No.19 of 2025, Application No.6 of 2025 In Election Petition No.19 of 2025, Application (L) No.24590 of 2025 In Election Petition No.19 of 2025
Decided On : 30-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ms. Neeta P. Karnik, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Jimmy Gonsalves, Mr. Shrirang P. Katneshwarkar, Mr. Anthony Floriyen Foss, Mr. Kallis Albert Alphanso, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Niteen Pradhan a/w. Ms. Shubhada Khot, Ms. Amita Kuttikrishnan and Ms. Sonal Dabholkar, Advocates

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.

Headnote:(A) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 83(1)(a), 100(1)(b), 100(1)(d)(i), 100(1)(d)(iv), 123(4), 33, 36(4) - Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 - Rules 4, 4A, Form 26 - Order VII Rule 11 CPC - Election petition challenging returned candidate’s election dismissed at threshold - Petition lacked concise statement of material facts demonstrating cause of action for improper nomination acceptance, corrupt practices or non-compliance materially affecting result - Nomination form and affidavit supplied by returning officer, scrutinized and accepted without substantial defect - Non-reproduction of disclaimer notes in pre-printed statutory form not attributable to candidate or ground for rejection - Allegations of government servant ineligibility belied by permission granted under relevant code - Vague, generic pleadings without particulars of dates, places, roles insufficient; strict compliance with Section 83(1)(a) mandatory, omission of material facts leads to dismissal without trial. (Paras 12-35)

(B) Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1979 - Rule 5 - Ashram Shala Sanhita 2019 - Clause 4.3.13 - Headmaster in aided ashram school not governed by civil services conduct rules prohibiting political activity; prior permission from management sufficient for contesting election. (Paras 7.7-7.8, 15)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner, securing second highest votes in assembly constituency election, filed petition alleging improper acceptance of returned candidate’s nomination due to incomplete Form 26 affidavit omitting disclaimer notes, corrupt practices under RP Act, undue influence on returning officer and ineligibility as government servant. Returned candidate sought dismissal under Order VII Rule 11 CPC for deficient pleadings.

Findings of Court:
Election petition rejected for non-disclosure of material facts under Section 83(1)(a) RP Act; no triable cause of action; nomination validly accepted post-scrutiny; other applications disposed.

Issues: Whether election petition maintainable without concise material facts pleaded; if alleged affidavit defects or servant status constituted substantial non-compliance materially affecting result.

Ratio Decidendi: Election petitions require precise pleadings of material facts constituting complete cause of action; mere bald allegations of non-compliance insufficient without proof of material effect on result; returning officer’s scrutiny under Section 36(4) precludes challenge absent substantial defect; cannot improve case at trial. Result : Application under Order VII Rule 11 allowed; election petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural applications challenge election petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. election schedule, results, and challenge grounds. (Para 7 , 8)
3. nomination validly accepted; no cause of action. (Para 9)
4. incomplete form-26 and service rules violations. (Para 10)
5. petition grounds allege corrupt practices. (Para 11)
6. grounds fail for lacking material facts. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
7. section 83 mandates concise material facts. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 21 , 22)
8. scrutiny rejects non-substantial defects only. (Para 20 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
9. non-disclosure dismisses petition under o vii r11. (Para 33 , 34 , 35)
10. petition dismissed; applications allowed. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39)

JUDGMENT :

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. Heard Ms. Karnik, learned Senior Advocate for Petitioner, Mr. Pradhan, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 in Election Petition and Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate for Applicant in Application (L) No.24590 of 2025.

2. Application (L) No.9497 of 2025 is filed by Mr. Harishachandra Sakharam Bhoye – Applicant / Orig. Respondent No.1 and Returned candidate seeking dismissal of Election Petition under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, (for short “CPC”). Respondent No. 1 is the returned candidate in the Election under challenge. Affidavit-in-reply dated 10.07.2025 is filed by Petitioner to oppose this Application.

3. Election Petition No.19 of 2025 is filed by Mr. Sunil (Bhau) Chandrakant Bhusara on 07.01.2025 for the following reliefs :-

“(a) the election of the Respondent No.1 to the General Election 2024 to the State Assembly from 129- Vikramgad (S.T.) Assembly Constituency, be declared to be void and it be further declared that the Petitioner, who has secured second highest votes/majority of votes in the said election, has been elected.”

4. Application No.6 of 2025 is filed by Mr. Harishachandra Sakharam Bhoye – Respondent No.1 seeking direction to Petitioner to furnish the copy of the Election Petition No.37 of 2025 along with its Annexures. However, vide order dated 06.11.2025 passed by this Court Election Petition No.37 of 2025 has been disposed of as withdrawn for the reason that Petitioner had filed identical Petition through another Advocate in this Court for the same cause of action.

5. Application (L) No.24590 of 2025 is an Intervention Application filed by Chief Electoral Officer, General Administration Department to intervene in Election Petition No.19 of 2025 and seeks following reliefs :-

“a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to declare that the EVM’s consisting of Ballot Units 358 and Control Units 358 which are kept in custody of the District Election Officer are not necessary for the adjudication or determining the dispute in the above Election Petition.

b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to release 358 Ballot Units and 358 Control Units which are kept in the custody of the District Election Officer.”

6. Respondent No. 1 has filed Application (L) No. 9497 of 2025 under Order VII Rule 11 seeking dismissal of the Election Petition on the grounds of violation of mandatory provision of Sections 83(1)(a), 100, 123(4) of RP Act read with Articles 173 and 191 of the Constitution of India and sought its dismissal. Pleadings in this Application are complete. By consent of parties Application (L) No. 9497 of 2025 is taken up for hearing and disposal.

7. Brief facts relevant for deciding the above application are as follows:-

7.1. Election Commission announced schedule for General Election 2024 to the Legislative Assembly of the State of Maharashtra as under:-

Poll Events	Maharashtra (All 288 Assembly Constituencies)
Date of issue of Gazette Notification	22.10.2024 (Tuesday)
Last Date of making nominations	29.102024 (Tuesday)
Date of Scrutiny of nominations	30.10.2024 (Wednesday)
Last Date for the withdrawal of candidatures	04.11.2024 (Monday)
Date of Poll	20.11.2024 (Wednesday)
Date of counting	23.11.2024 (Saturday)
Date before which election shall be completed	25.11.202

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Bom) 118

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.

Cases Referred (13)

Related Judgments

In The Matter of : Sunil (Bhau) Chandrakant Bhusara vs Harishchandra Sakharam Bhoye - 2026 Supreme(Bom) 118

Sangram Sampatrao Deshmukh VS Election Commissioner Of India Through The Chief Election Commissioner - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 29

Rahul Vasudevbhai Vyas VS Hemang Yogeshbhai Joshi - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 1786

Rahul Vasudevbhai Vyas vs Hemang Yogeshbhai Joshi - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 5195

DURLABHJIBHAI HARAKJIBHAI DETHARIAV/sLALITBHAI KARAMSHIBHAI KAGATHARA - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 7952

In The Matter Nayana Manoj Vasani vs Narendra Lalachan Mehta - 2026 Supreme(Bom) 105

Prashant Kumar Singh VS Hakim Lal - 2023 Supreme(All) 1953

In the matter between : Sudhir Brijendra Jain vs Rajendra Dhedya Gavit - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 4232

Dillip Kumar Ray vs Sarada Prasad Nayak - 2026 Supreme(Ori) 132

M.G. Poornachandrathejaswi, S/o. Late Gowde Gowda M.G. vs Shreyas M. Patel, S/o. Late P. Mahesh - 2025 Supreme(Kar) 40