The Supreme Court of India has issued a notice in response to an appeal by former BJP MP Maneka Gandhi challenging the Allahabad High Court's dismissal of her election petition. Gandhi's petition sought to contest the election of the Samajwadi Party's Rambhual Nishad in the Sultanpur Lok Sabha elections of 2024.
However, the Court declined to entertain her request to challenge Section 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.
Justice Surya Kant, leading the bench, highlighted the importance of periodic reviews of laws to assess their effectiveness and identify any potential shortcomings. He stressed that such reviews should not be limited to judicial assessments but should include legislative evaluations, suggesting that reviews could occur every 20 to 50 years.
Along with Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, Justice Kant emphasized the need for an expert body to assess whether laws have achieved their intended objectives.
The Allahabad High Court had previously dismissed Gandhi’s petition on the grounds that it was barred by Section 81, read with Section 86, of the Representation of People Act. The petition had been filed beyond the statutory 45-day limit for election challenges. The High Court found that the petition, which had been filed on July 27, 2024, exceeded the prescribed timeline, as the election results were declared on June 6, 2024.
The Supreme Court clarified that, in hearing an election petition, the High Court does not function as a Constitutional Court and does not possess extraordinary powers. As such, Gandhi’s claim regarding the violation of constitutional rights and voters' right to information was not acceptable. The Court reiterated that an election petition cannot be considered unless it is timely filed and within the jurisdiction specified by the 1951 Act.
Gandhi’s petition alleged that Nishad, who won the Sultanpur seat by over 43,000 votes, had failed to disclose his full criminal record in his nomination affidavit. Specifically, it was claimed that he had listed only eight cases instead of twelve, omitting details of cases from Pipraich and Bardhalganj police stations in Gorakhpur.
In its ruling, the High Court referenced Section 86 of the Representation of People Act, which mandates the dismissal of any election petition not filed in compliance with Section 81 or Section 82 of the Act. The High Court emphasized that there is no provision in the Act to allow for the condonation of delays in filing election petitions beyond the prescribed 45-day period.
The Supreme Court's notice is a significant development in this ongoing legal challenge. However, the Court's refusal to entertain the challenge to Section 81 of the Act indicates that the procedural and jurisdictional aspects of election petitions remain central in such cases.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy