IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
NANI TAGIA, J.
Nuney Tayang S/o Late Posu Tayang – Petitioner
Versus
Karikho Kri S/o Late Sotri Kri – Respondent
Election Petition No. 01(AP) of 2019
Decided On : 17-07-2023
JUDGMENT :
NANI TAGIA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Dilip Mazumdar, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Sandi K. Deori, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the election petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. Khoda Tama, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1.
2. By filing this election petition under Section 80, 80-A, and 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951; the petitioner has sought for a declaration that the election to the Member of Legislative Assembly from 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency, held pursuant to the Notification No. 464/ARUN-LA/2019, dated 18.03.2019, in respect of respondents No. 1 and 2, be declared void under Section 90(a)(c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, on the grounds stipulated under sections 100(1)(b), 100(1)(d)(i) and 100(d)(iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and to declare the petitioner to be duly elected from the 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency under Section 101(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
3. The facts relevant for adjudication of the election petition, briefly, stated, are as follows:
(a) the 25th March, 2019 (Monday), as the last date for making nominations.
(b) the 26th March, 2019 (Tuesday), as the date for the scrutiny of nominations.
(c) the 28th March, 2019 (Thursday), as the last date for the withdrawal of candidatures.
(d) the 11th April, 2019 (Thursday) as the date on which a poll shall, if necessary, be taken.
(e) the 27th May, 2019 (Monday), as the date before which the election shall be completed.
(ii) The petitioner being an elector of 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency, Arunachal Pradesh, and eligible to contest the election for the Legislative Assembly of the State, held in the year 2019, had presented his nomination paper to the Returning Officer as an Indian National Congress (INC) candidate for contesting the Assembly Election for the year 2019 from 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency. The respondent No. 1, Shri Karikho Kri, and respondent No. 2, Dr. Mohesh Chai, had also presented their nomination papers for contesting the Legislative Assembly Election for the year 2019 from 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency, as an independent candidate and Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP) candidate, respectively. Two other persons, namely, Smti. Bagilu Kri, and Shri Konteso Kri, who are the wife and the brother of respondent No. 1, respectively, had also presented their nomination papers for election to the 44-Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency, as independent candidates. On receipt of the nomination papers, the Returning Officer of 44- Tezu(ST) Assembly Constituency, had notified the nominations received along with the affidavits submitted with the nomination papers and the s
Christ Charitable Trust and Educational Charitable Society vs. Ponniamman Educational Trust
D. Venkata Reddy vs. R. Sultan and Others
HDFC Bank Limited vs. Reshma and Others
Kisan Shankar Kathore vs. Arun Dattatray Sawant
Lok Prahari through its General Secretary S.N. Shukla vs. Union of India and Others
M. Chinnasamy vs. K.C. Palanisamy and Others
M. Karunanidhi vs. H.V. Hande and Others
M.M.B. Catholicos vs. M.P. Athanasius
M/s. Sri Ram Industrial Enterprises Ltd. vs. Mahak Singh
Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithviraj Singh vs. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh
Mairembam Prithviraj vs. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh
Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Bangalore vs. S. Mani
Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes and Others vs. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira (Dead)
N.T. Veluswami Thewar vs. G. Raja Nainar
Narbada Devi Gupta vs. Birendra Kumar Jaiswal
Naveen Kumar vs. Vijay Kumar and Others
People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs. Union of India
Pradip Buragohain vs. Pranati Phukan
Putuli Das vs. Dina Nath Talukdar
Purna Kala Devi vs. State of Assam
Satish Ukey vs. Devendra Gangadharrao Fadnavis
Shiv Charan Singh vs. Chandra Bhan Singh
(1) Election petition – Success of a winning candidate at an election should not be lightly interfered with.(2) There is no absolute mandate that every non-disclosure, irrespective of its gravity and....
The court upheld the returning officer's acceptance of a nomination despite omissions in the affidavit, determining these defects were not substantial and did not materially affect the election resul....
The election petition was dismissed due to failure to prove that the alleged non-compliance with election affidavit laws materially affected the election outcome.
Non-disclosure of material facts in election affidavits constitutes corrupt practice, affecting election results and undermining electoral integrity.
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 re....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.