Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Pat) 1036

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sunil Kumar Panwar, J.
Syed Abu Dojana, son of S. Rahmatullah - Petitioner
Vs.
Dilip Ray Son Of Late Yogendra Ray - Respondent
Election Petition No.20 of 2020
Decided On : 05-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Sarvendra Kumar Verma, Mr. Jai Vardhan Narayan
For the Respondent: Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, Mr. Awnish Kumar, Mr. Bandana Singh, Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh

The election petition was dismissed as the petitioner failed to prove that the alleged non-compliance with asset disclosure and publication of criminal antecedents materially affected the election result.

Headnote:(A) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 80, 80-A, 81, and 100 - Election petition challenging the election of a candidate on grounds of suppression of asset information and failure to publish criminal antecedents - The petitioner claimed that the returned candidate did not disclose immovable assets and failed to publish criminal records as required - The court found that the petitioner did not prove that the alleged non-compliance materially affected the election result - The election petition was dismissed for lack of merit. (Paras 2, 12, 82, 84)

(B) Election Law - Disclosure of Assets - Candidates must disclose all assets in their nomination papers, and failure to do so can lead to disqualification if it materially affects the election outcome - Mere procedural irregularities do not suffice for declaring an election void. (Paras 58, 81)

(C) Criminal Antecedents - Candidates are required to publish their criminal records as per Supreme Court directives - The court held that the returned candidate complied with the publication requirements. (Paras 45, 72)

(D) Counting of Votes - The court emphasized that any irregularities in vote counting must be shown to materially affect the election result to invalidate it. (Paras 76, 80)

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. The present Election Petition has been filed under Sections 80, 80-A, 81 and 100 of the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the R.P. Act) questioning the election of the respondent No. 1 as the Member of Bihar Legislative Assembly from 26, Sursand Assembly Constituency in the District of Sitamarhi in the election held on 07.11.2020.

3. The pleadings on record shows that the following schedule was fixed for conducting the said election.

Last date for filing the nomination paper	20.10.2020
Date of presentation of nomination paper by returned candidate Sri. Dilip Roy	19.10.2020
Date of scrutiny of nomination paper	21.10.2020
Date of withdrawal of the candidature	23.10.2020
Date of poll	07.11.2020
Date of declaration of result	10.11.2020
Date before which the election shall be completed	12.11.2020

4. Altogether 16 candidates had contested in the said election of 26 Sursand Assembly Constituency. The returned candidate Sri. Dilip Ray (respondent No. 1) was contesting from Janta Dal United (JDU) party and he had secured 67193 votes. The election petitioner was the contesting candidate of the aforesaid election from Rashtriya Janda Dal (RJD) party on election symbol ‘Lantern’ and he was the next runner up having secured 58317 votes.

5. The present election petition has been filed by the election petitioner for setting aside the aforesaid election of 26 Sursand Assembly Constituency as the returned candidate, respondent No. 1 had suppressed the information in this regard to his assets (immovable) as well as the assets of his spouse/wife namely Smt. Shakuntla Devi in the affidavit filed by him along with the nomination paper in Column 7B of Form 26 whereas the returned candidate and his spouse owns several immovable assets worth rupees several crores.

6. The returned candidate had also failed to publish electronically the details of his criminal antecedent as provided by him in Clause 5(II) of the Nomination paper. The returned candidate was duty bound to publish his declaration in Format C1 as prescribed by the Election Commission of India and the commands of the Apex Court for at least on three different dates from the day following the last date of withdrawal of candidatures and up to two days before the date of poll.

7. The returned candidate and his spouse namely Smt. Shakuntla Devi are the owners of the following immovable assets, the details of which have not been furnished by the returned candidate in his affidavit Column 7B of Form 26.

8. The details of assets standing in the name of the returned candidate Sri. Dilip Ray (respondent No.1) suppressed by him are extracted hereunder:

(ii) Khata No. 1029, Plot No. 9404, Deed No. 5634 dated 18.07.2017, area 8 decimals, situated at Circle Runni Saidpur, Thana Rampur Runnisaidpur, District Sub-Registry Office, Belsand, Land Type-Residential.

(iii) Khata No. 1029, Plot No. 9404, Deed No. 5633 dated 18.07.2017, area 8 decimals, situated at Circle Runni Saidpur, Thana Rampur Runnisaidpur, District Sub-Registry Office, Belsand, Land Type-Residential.

(iv) Khata No. 410, Plot No. 3580, Deed No. 3709 dated 18.07.2017, area 5 decimals, situated at Circle Dumra, District Sub-Registry Office, Sitamarhi Sadar, Land Type-Developing.

9. The details of assets standing in the name of the spouse of returned candidate Smt. Shakuntala Devi which have been suppressed by the returned candidate in the affidavit, are given below.

(ii) Khata No. 322, Plot No. 399, Deed No. 8981 dated 30.09.2019, area 5