Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Representation of the People Act, 1951

342 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act — showing 201–342.

MORESHWAR SAVEversusDWARKADAS YASHWANTRAO PATHRIKAR

1995 INSC 87211 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Moreshwar Save was elected from the Aurangabad parliamentary constituency, but his election was set aside by the Bombay High Court on the ground that corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, were committed through speeches by Manohar Joshi and Bal Thackeray. The

CHANDRAKANTA GOYALversusSOHAN SINGH JODH SINGH KOHLI

1995 INSC 87311 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, ChandraKanta Goyal, a BJP candidate, was declared elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from Matunga in 1990. The respondent, S.S.J.S. Kohli of Janata Dal, filed an election petition alleging that the appellant committed corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation

SH. SURYAKANT VENKATARAO MAHADIKversusSMT. SAROJ SANDESH NAIK (BHOSALE)

1995 INSC 87411 December 1995Dismissed

Suryakant V. Mahadik, a Shiv Sena candidate, was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from the Nehru Nagar constituency. Saroj Sandesh Naik filed an election petition alleging that Mahadik, during a religious gathering at Sarveshwar Mandir, appealed to voters on the basis of "Hindutva" and urged them to vote

C. P. JOHNversusBABU M. PALISSERY & ORS.

2014 INSC 62511 September 2014Dismissed

C.P. John, a losing candidate, filed an election petition challenging the election of Babu M. Palissery on grounds of bribery, false pamphlet distribution and alleged suppression of criminal convictions. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding it lacked material facts and was non‑compliant with Section 83 of the

G.V. SREERAMA REDDY AND ANR.versusRETURNING OFFICER AND ORS.

2009 INSC 104111 August 2009Disposed off

In the 2008 Bagepalli Legislative Assembly election, the CPM candidate G.V. Sreerama Reddy (appellant) lost after a recount and filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition was filed by his advocate without the petitioner’s personal presence, leading the Karnat

SUBHASH DESAIversusPRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2023 INSC 51611 May 2023Disposed off

After the 2019 Maharashtra elections a coalition government (MVA) led by Uddhav Thackeray collapsed in mid‑2022 when the Shiv Sena split into two factions headed by Thackeray and Eknath Shinde. The Governor, relying on letters from opposition leaders and a resolution of 34 Shiv Sena MLAs, directed Thackeray to prove hi

DR. K. KRISHNA MURTHY & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2010 INSC 30711 May 2010Disposed off

The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of Articles 243‑O(4), 243‑O(6), 243‑T(4) and 243‑T(6) inserted by the 73rd and 74th Amendments, arguing that reservations of chairperson posts and of seats for backward classes in Panchayats and Municipalities violated equality, democracy and the basic structure. T

DHARTIPAKAR MADAN LAL AGARWALversusRAJIV GANDHI

1987 INSC 16111 May 1987Dismissed

M.L. Agarwal challenged the 1981 Lok Sabha election of Rajiv Gandhi alleging various corrupt practices. The High Court struck out the petition as vague, frivolous and lacking a cause of action under Order VI Rule 16 and rejected it under Order VII Rule 11. Agarwal appealed, contending that the court had no jurisdiction

A. NEELALOHITHADASAN NADARversusGEORGE MASCRENE AND OTHERS

1994 INSC 15011 April 1994Dismissed

The appellant, A. Neelalohithadasan Nadar, was declared elected from the Kovalam Assembly seat, but the first respondent, George Mascrene, filed an election petition alleging double voting and void votes under Section 62(4) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. The Kerala High Court inspected ballot papers and ele

BUDH SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

2013 INSC 14411 March 2013Dismissed

Budh Singh was convicted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and sentenced to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Section 32A of the NDPS Act, which bars any remission of sentence for convicts

RAJ KUMAR YADAVversusSAMIR KUMAR MAHASETH AND ORS

2005 INSC 13011 March 2005Appeal(s) allowed

An election petition was presented to the designated election judge of the Patna High Court at 4:25 pm on the last day of the 45‑day limitation period, after the judge had retired from open court but was still in chambers. The judge refused to accept the petition, citing High Court Rules that required presentation only

BOLIN CHETIAversusJOGADISH BHUYAN AND ORS.

2005 INSC 13611 March 2005

Bolin Chetia, a losing candidate in the Assam Legislative Assembly election, appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 after his election petition was dismissed by the High Court. The Court considered whether a statutory first appeal of right must automatically be ad

D.RAMACHANDRANversusR.V. JANAKIRAMAN AND ORS.

1999 INSC 9711 March 1999Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1996 Pondicherry Legislative Assembly election, D. Ramachandran filed an election petition alleging that R.V. Janakiraman, who was declared elected, committed multiple corrupt practices including falsifying voter lists, exceeding expenditure limits, and using government servants for canvassing. Janakiraman denie

MANOHAR JOSHI ETC.versusDAMODAR TATYABA @ DADASAHEB RUPWATE AND ORS.

1991 INSC 6911 March 1991Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1989 Lok Sabha election, a defeated candidate challenged the election of the winner on grounds of corrupt practices under sections 123(2), (3) and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Bombay High Court, after finding the charges proved, issued notices under section 99 to three persons, includi

K. PRABHAKARANversusP. JAYARAJAN

2005 INSC 2311 January 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined two election disputes where candidates had been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of more than two years, raising questions about disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It held that the relevant dates for determining qualification are the date

RAJBALA & OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS

2015 INSC 91210 December 2015Dismissed

The petitioners challenged four new disqualification clauses (t, u, v, w) inserted in Section 175(1) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, arguing that they violated Article 14 by creating unreasonable classifications and that the right to vote and the right to contest elections are fundamental constitutional rights

KEDAR SHASHIKANT DESHPANDE ETC. ETC.versusBHOR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2010 INSC 87110 December 2010Dismissed

The appellants were elected as councillors of Bhor Municipal Council on the ticket of the NCP, later left the party and formed a new political front. Respondents filed a disqualification petition under the Maharashtra Local Authority Members Disqualification Act, 1986, alleging that the appellants had voluntarily given

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusSHIVAJI & ORS.

1987 INSC 31910 November 1987Appeal(s) allowed

The Election Commission of India appealed against two interim orders issued by the Bombay High Court that postponed the withdrawal deadline and stayed the poll for a Legislative Council election in Maharashtra. The respondents had filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the validity of the Election Commissi

B.S. YADIYURAPPAversusMAHALINGAPPA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 49510 October 2001Appeal(s) allowed

B.S. Yadiyurappa filed an election petition in the Karnataka High Court challenging the election of Mahalingappa and named the other two candidates, the Returning Officer and the District Election Commissioner as respondents. The first respondent and the two officials moved to delete their names and sought dismissal of

TARUN PRASAD CHATTERJEEversusDINANATH SHARMA

2000 INSC 47510 October 2000Dismissed

In the 1998 Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, the appellant was declared elected on 28 November 1998. The respondent filed an election petition under Section 81(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 on 12 January 1999, seeking to challenge the result. The appellant contended that the petition was

T.DEEN DAYALversusTHE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

1997 INSC 64710 September 1997Dismissed

T. Deen Dayal, a Rajya Sabha candidate, filed a transfer application in an election petition alleging bias and corruption against the presiding judge. The judge deemed the allegations baseless and scandalous, initiating suo moto contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The High Court convicted Dayal

BRAJESH SINGHversusSUNIL ARORA & ORS.

2021 INSC 38810 August 2021Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a contempt petition filed by Brajesh Singh alleging that several political parties wilfully disobeyed the Court's order dated 13‑02‑2020, which required parties to disclose the criminal antecedents of their candidates and the reasons for their selection, within 48 hours of nomination. The

SUSHIL KUMAR SINGHALversusTHE REGIONAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

2010 INSC 49310 August 2010Dismissed

The appellant, a peon of Punjab National Bank, was convicted under Section 409 IPC for embezzling Rs 5,000 and was dismissed from service. While his criminal appeal upheld the conviction, the appellate court released him on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The bank dismissed him under Section 10(1)

LILY THOMASversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 45610 July 2013Case Allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Parliament had the constitutional authority to enact sub‑section (4) of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which postpones the operation of disqualification for sitting members of Parliament or State Legislatures pending an appeal. The Court held that the power t

THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER ETC.versusJAN CHAUKIDAR (PEOPLES WATCH) & ORS

2013 INSC 45710 July 2013Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the view that a person confined in prison or in police custody, who is barred from voting under sub‑section (5) of Section 62 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, is not an elector and therefore cannot contest elections. The High Court held that such a person loses the statutory rig

ARVIND KEJRIWALversusDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

2024 INSC 40010 May 2024

Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested on 21 March 2024 by the Directorate of Enforcement in connection with alleged offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and related statutes. He challenged the arrest before the Supreme Court, arguing that the legality of his detention was sub judic

MARKIO TADOversusTAKAM SORANG

2013 INSC 33810 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed

In the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election of 2009, Markio Tado was declared elected over Takam Sorang. Sorang filed an election petition alleging booth capturing, and later sought forensic examination of voters' counterfoils (Form 17A) to prove impersonation and double voting. The Gauhati High Court Single

INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS (I)versusINSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WELFARE AND ORS.

2002 INSC 27810 May 2002Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Election Commission of India (ECI) could de‑register a political party under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 when the party called a hartal that involved force, intimidation or coercion, allegedly violating the Constitution. The Kerala High Court had dire

F.A. SAPA ETC. ETC.versusSINGORA AND ORS. ETC.

1991 INSC 13810 May 1991Case Partly allowed

In the 1989 Mizoram Assembly elections, fifteen unsuccessful MNF candidates filed election petitions alleging corrupt practices by the elected Congress(I) candidates. The High Court rejected preliminary objections, allowed certain amendments, and struck out vague paragraphs, prompting the returned candidates to appeal

V.A. SHABEERversusP.A. NIAMATHULLA

2008 INSC 47410 April 2008Case Allowed

In the 2005 Alangad Block Panchayat election, V.A. Shabeer was declared elected from Ward No.2. The defeated candidate, P.A. Niamathulla, challenged the election alleging that the nomination papers were not delivered to a duly authorized officer and that Shabeer had not taken the required oath before a person authorize

T.A. AHAMMED KABEERversusA.A. AZEEZ AND ORS.

2003 INSC 22810 April 2003Dismissed

In the Kerala Legislative Assembly election for Eravipuram, A.A. Azeez was declared elected by a margin of 21 votes over T.A. Ahamed Kabeer, who filed an election petition alleging double voting, impersonation, defective voter lists and invalid postal votes. The returned candidate filed a recrimination petition under S

SULTAN AHMD. OWASIversusMOHD. OSMAN SHAHEED AND ORS.

1980 INSC 7210 April 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Two election petitions were filed by defeated candidates alleging that the elected candidate, Sultan Ahmad Owasi, indulged in corrupt practice by delivering speeches that promoted religious hatred. The appellant denied making any such speeches and sought to prove an alibi, claiming he was in Adoni at the relevant times

AELTEMESH REINversusCHANDULAL CHANDRAKAR & OTHERS

1981 INSC 6010 March 1981Dismissed

Aeltemesh Rein, a Lok Sabha candidate, filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, claiming to have deposited the required security of Rs.2,000 as mandated by Section 117, although no deposit was actually made. The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition for non‑c

R.C. POUDYAL AND ANR. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1993 INSC 5110 February 1993Dismissed

The petitions filed by Sikkimese of Nepali origin challenged the reservation of twelve seats for Bhutia‑Lepcha and one seat for the Buddhist Sangha in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly, arguing that these provisions violated Articles 14, 15(1), 325, 332(3) and the basic structure of the Constitution. The Court examined w

RAJA RAM PALversusTHE HONBLE SPEAKER, LOK SABHA & ORS.

2007 INSC 2210 January 2007Dismissed

Members of Parliament were expelled from the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha after television sting operations ('cash for query') showed them accepting money for raising questions in Parliament. Inquiry Committees were constituted by each House, reports were tabled, and motions were adopted expelling the members. The expelle

SARITHA S. NAIRversusHIBI EDEN

2020 INSC 6939 December 2020Dismissed

Saritha S. Nair filed nominations from two Lok Sabha seats but her nominations were rejected because she had been convicted in two criminal cases, each carrying a three‑year imprisonment, invoking disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. She challenged the rejection through ele

GANESH NAGARAO RAUT DUDHAGAONKARversusRAJANI SHANKARRAO SATAV AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4679 December 1998Dismissed

In a municipal council election with 424 voters, the quota for election was 213 votes. No candidate reached the quota, leading to successive rounds of elimination under the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961. The appellant, G.N.R. Dudhagaonkar, contended that 71 ballot papers, which were declared exhausted because they co

RAVI NAMBOOTHIRIversusK.A. BAIJU & ORS

2022 INSC 11879 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ravi Namboothiri, was elected councilor of Ward No.5 of Annamanada Gram Panchayat in 2015. After his election, the respondent filed an election petition alleging that the appellant had failed to disclose a past conviction under the Kerala Police Act (Section 38 read with Section 52) in Form 2A, thereby f

KALAMATA MOHAN RAOversusNARAYANA RAO DHARMANA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 7119 November 1995Dismissed

K.M. Rao, a Telugu Desam Party candidate, was elected to the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly in 1989. An election petition alleged that he committed a corrupt practice under Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act by using posters that depicted party leader N.T. Rama Rao as the Hindu deity Lord Krish

JASWANT SINGHversusVIRENDER SINGH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 5069 November 1994

The appellant Jaswant Singh and the respondent Virender Singh contested the 1991 Haryana Legislative Assembly election, with the respondent declared elected. The appellant filed an election petition under Sections 81 and 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 alleging irregularities, tampering of vote counts

UDEY CHANDversusSURAT SINGH AND ANR.

2009 INSC 11829 October 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Udey Chand, was declared Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat by a margin of four votes. The election petitioner, Surat Singh, filed an election petition under Section 176(4)(b) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, seeking a recount of votes alleging irregularities in counting and misconduct by the Returning

KIRPAL SINGH, M.L.A.versusUTTAM SINGH & ANR.

1985 INSC 2269 October 1985Disposed off

Kirpal Singh was elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly in 1972, but his election was set aside by the Punjab and Haryana High Court because the nomination of another candidate, Basant Singh, had been improperly rejected on the ground that he was a development officer in the Life Insurance Corporation, a public sec

SMT. PRAMILA NESARGIversusC.K. JAFFER SHARIEF AND ORS.

1994 INSC 3059 August 1994Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined challenges to the Lok Sabha election of C.K. Jaffer Sharief from Bangalore North, alleging that the candidate engaged in corrupt practices by arranging large‑scale free mass feedings of electors, exceeding election‑expenditure limits, and using spurious ballot papers. The Court held that mass

ANUKUL CHANDRA PRADHANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5459 July 1997Dismissed

Anukul Chandrapradhan filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging Section 62(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which bars prisoners and persons in police custody from voting, except those under preventive detention. He contended that the provision violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution a

PRAMOD LAXMAN GUDADHEversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2018 INSC 4649 May 2018Dismissed

Petitioner Pramod Laxman Gudadhe filed a PIL challenging the Election Commission's decision to hold a bye‑election after the resignation of the Lok Sabha member from Bhandara‑Gondiya constituency. He argued that the remaining term would be less than one year, making the election futile and an undue burden on the excheq

KAMENG DOLOversusATUMWELLY

2017 INSC 4619 May 2017Dismissed

Kameng Dolo was elected unopposed to the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly after the other candidate, Atum Welly, allegedly withdrew his candidature. The High Court held that the withdrawal notice did not comply with the requirements of Section 37 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and declared Dolo's e

KISAN SHANKAR KATHOREversusARUN DATTATRAY SAWANT & ORS

2014 INSC 3849 May 2014Dismissed

Kisan Shankar Kathore was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly, but a voter filed an election petition under RPA s.100(1)(d)(i) and (iv) alleging that Kathore’s nomination was improperly accepted because he failed to disclose government dues, his wife’s bungalow and vehicle, and his interest in a partnership

JIBONTARA GHATOWARversusSARBANANDA SONOWAL AND ORS.

2003 INSC 2919 May 2003Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2001 Assam Legislative Assembly election for constituency No.115 Moran, Sarbananda Sonowal was declared elected, defeating Jibontara Ghatowar by 850 votes. Eight hundred twenty‑four ballot papers were rejected because they lacked the presiding officer’s signature and distinguishing mark. Ghatowar filed an electi

PRAKASH KHANDREversusDR. VIJAY KUMAR KHANDRE AND ORS.

2002 INSC 2729 May 2002Case Partly allowed

In the Karnataka Legislative Assembly election for the Bhalki constituency, Prakash Khandre was declared elected. Dr. Vijay Kumar Khandre challenged the result, alleging that Prakash Khandre was disqualified under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 because of subsisting contracts with the State Go

RAGHBLR SINGH GILLversusGURCHARAN SINGH TOHRA & ORS.

1980 INSC 1279 May 1980Dismissed

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by independent candidate Raghbir Singh Gill challenging the setting aside of his election to the Council of States on grounds of tampered postal ballot papers. The High Court had found that four postal ballots, originally cast for Akali candidate Gurcharan Singh Tohra, were altered

KARIKHO KRIversusNUNEY TAYANG AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 2899 April 2024Disposed off

In the 2019 Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, independent candidate Karikho Kri was elected from Tezu (ST) constituency. Nuney Tayang challenged the election, alleging that Kri failed to disclose three vehicles, a no‑dues certificate for government accommodation, and municipal/property tax liabilities, t

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusBAJRANG BAHADUR SINGH & ORS.

2015 INSC 3059 April 2015Dismissed

Bajrang Bahadur Singh was elected to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly in 2012 and subsequently entered into four contracts with the State. The Governor, under Article 192, declared Singh disqualified under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, causing his seat to be declared vacant and a bye‑e

JAGMAL SINGH YADAVversusAIMADUDDIN AHMED KHAN

1994 INSC 1099 March 1994Disposed off

The appellant Jagmal Singh Yadav was elected to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly, but his election was set aside by the High Court on the ground that he had committed a corrupt practice under section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act by causing a defamatory news item to be published against the responden

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusTELANGANA RASTRA SAMITHI & ANR.

2010 INSC 8628 December 2010Disposed off

The Election Commission of India withheld bye‑elections in the Vemulawada and Sircilla Assembly constituencies because an election petition challenging the previous election was pending. The petitioners challenged this decision before the Supreme Court, which examined the interpretation of Section 151A of the Represent

VIRENDER NATH GAUTAMversusSATPAL SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9788 December 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a defeated candidate in a Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, filed an election petition alleging several irregularities including votes cast by dead persons, double voting, voting in multiple constituencies, and double postal ballots, which he claimed materially affected the result. The High

SATHI VIJAY KUMARversusTOTA SINGH AND ORS.

2006 INSC 9728 December 2006Disposed off

Sathi Vijay Kumar, a losing candidate in the 2002 Punjab Assembly election, filed an election petition alleging that the returned candidate, Tota Singh, had committed corrupt practices, including the wrongful deletion of 586 voters' names and the assistance of a gazetted officer. The High Court dismissed several paragr

MEERA KANWARIAversusSUNITA AND ORS.

2005 INSC 6058 December 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The first respondent, a Rajput woman, married a Scheduled Caste man and fraudulently obtained a Scheduled Caste certificate by birth, which was later cancelled. She contested a Delhi municipal corporation election for a seat reserved for Scheduled Caste women and was declared elected. The appellant, another candidate,

B. DANDAPANI PATRAversusRETURNING OFFICER-CUM-SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BERHAMPUR AND OTHERS

1989 INSC 3388 November 1989Dismissed

The appellant, a candidate for the Orissa Legislative Assembly, filed his nomination from Gopalpur while being an elector in Sorada. He submitted an attested copy of the Sorada electoral roll as it existed on 21 July 1983, arguing that this satisfied the requirement of Section 33(5) of the Representation of the People

AZMAT KHANversusKHILLAN SINGH & OTHERS

1983 INSC 1718 November 1983Dismissed

In the 1980 Haryana Legislative Assembly election for constituency No.5 (Hathin), the returned candidate Azmatkhan secured 12,828 votes and was declared elected. Respondent Khillan Singh filed an election petition, and the returned candidate filed a recrimination petition under Section 97 of the Representation of the P

DR. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMYversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

2013 INSC 6998 October 2013Disposed off

Dr. Subramanian Swamy filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Election Commission of India (ECI) to incorporate a voter‑verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) in electronic voting machines (EVMs) to allow voters to confirm their votes. The High Court dismissed the petition, prompting an ap

NANDIESHA REDDYversusMRS. KAVITHA MAHESH

2011 INSC 4808 July 2011Dismissed

In the 2008 Karnataka Assembly election, the returned candidate Nandiesha Reddy's election was challenged by Kavitha Mahesh, who alleged that her nomination paper, signed by ten electors, was illegally rejected by the Returning Officer. The petitioner filed an election petition and the returned candidate sought to stri

LILA KRISHANversusMANI RAM GODARA & ORS

1985 INSC 1318 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In a 1983 by‑election for the Fatehabad Assembly constituency, Lila Krishan was declared elected, but two rival candidates, Mani Ram Chapola and Raj Tilak, had their nomination papers rejected because the serial numbers of their proposers were shown as 126 and 177 instead of the correct 26 and 77. The Punjab & Haryana

UMED SINGH RAOversusMANI RAM GODARA & ORS

1985 INSC 1338 May 1985Appeal(s) allowed

In a Haryana Assembly by‑election, the Returning Officer (Umed Singh Rao) rejected the nomination papers of two candidates on the ground that the proposers' serial numbers did not match the electoral roll. The successful candidate’s election was challenged, and the Punjab & Haryana High Court held that the nomination p

DR. P. NALLA THAMPY TERAHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1985 INSC 1288 May 1985Dismissed

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Explanation 1 to Section 77(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which exempts expenditures incurred by political parties or other persons (other than the candidate or his agent) from being counted towards the candidate's election‑expense ceiling. The

THE STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusTHE GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

2025 INSC 4818 April 2025Disposed off

The State of Tamil Nadu challenged the Governor's actions in withholding assent to 10 bills and reserving them for the President's consideration after the bills were repassed by the State Legislature. The Supreme Court examined the scope of the Governor's powers under Article 200 of the Constitution, including whether

KARIM UDDIN BARBHUIYAversusAMINUL HAQUE LASKAR & ORS.

2024 INSC 2828 April 2024Case Allowed

The appellant, Karim Uddin Barbhuiya, contested the dismissal of his application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of an election petition filed by Aminul Haque Laskar alleging false statements in the appellant's nomination affidavit and improper acceptance of his nomination. The Supreme Court examined whet

G.M. SIDDESHWARversusPRASANNA KUMAR

2013 INSC 1428 March 2013Dismissed

The case concerned an election petition challenging the 2009 Lok Sabha election of G.M. Siddeshwar, wherein the petitioner Prasanna Kumar alleged corrupt practices. The petitioner filed an affidavit in the form prescribed by Rule 94‑A (Form No.25) but the affidavit was not in exact format and the verification was defec

KAMALNATHversusSUDESH VERMA

2002 INSC 68 January 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Kamalnath, who was elected from the Chhindwara Lok Sabha constituency, was challenged by Sudesh Verma through an election petition alleging a corrupt practice under Section 123(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for exceeding the prescribed expenditure ceiling. The Madhya Pradesh High Court struck several

DADAJI ALIAS DINAversusSUKHDEOBABU & ORS.

1979 INSC 2327 November 1979Dismissed

In the 1978 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election for the Armori constituency (reserved for Scheduled Tribes), the appellant Dadaji was declared elected, claiming membership in the "Mana" community. The unsuccessful candidate challenged the election, arguing that Dadaji did not belong to any Scheduled Tribe listed

EBRAHIM SULAIMAN SAITversusM. C. MUHAMMAD AND ANR.

1978 INSC 2267 November 1978Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Ebrahim Sulaiman Sait, was elected to the Lok Sabha from Manjeri, Kerala, but his election was declared void by the Kerala High Court on the ground that a speech he made during the campaign promoted religious enmity, violating Section 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The appellant c

RAMESHWAR PRASAD AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4917 October 2005

The Supreme Court examined writ petitions challenging the Governor's proclamation dated 23 May 2005 that dissolved the Bihar Legislative Assembly after the state had been placed under President's Rule on 7 March 2005. The petitions argued that the dissolution was unconstitutional because the assembly was kept in suspen

M. CHANDRAversusM. THANGAMUTHU & ANR.

2010 INSC 5787 September 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, M. Chandra, was elected from a Tamil Nadu assembly seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, but the election petitioner challenged her eligibility on the ground that she was a Christian and not a member of the Hindu Pallan Scheduled Caste. The High Court shifted the burden of proof onto the appellant to demon

RAM SINGH & ORS.versusCOL. RAM SINGH

1985 INSC 1697 August 1985Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition challenging the election of Col. Ram Singh on allegations of corrupt practice, including booth‑capturing and intimidation at two polling stations in the 1982 Haryana Assembly election. The petitioners relied heavily on oral testimony and tape‑recorded statements taken by

PRADIP BURAGOHAINversusPRANATI PHUKAN

2010 INSC 3707 July 2010Dismissed

The appellant, Pradip Buragohain, challenged the election of Pranati Phukan to the Assam Legislative Assembly on the ground that she committed seven acts of corrupt practice, chiefly bribery of Rs.500 per voter and organizing a feast on polling day. The High Court dismissed the election petition, finding the oral testi

NATIONAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORY LTD.versusSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA

2017 INSC 2067 March 2017Disposed off

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) issued an administrative circular under Section 11(1) of the SEBI Act to curb dematerialisation charges. National Securities Depository Ltd. (NSDL) challenged the circular, arguing that it could not be appealed before the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) under Sectio

EDAPADDI K. PALANISWAMIversusDHINAKARAN & ORS.

[2019] 3 S.C.R. 2007 February 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court considered a miscellaneous application filed by T.T.V. Dhinakaran (respondent No.1) seeking directions to use a common symbol and name for his faction in upcoming elections, while a writ petition challenging the Election Commission's (ECI) decision on the AIADMK party split remained pending before the

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusST. MARYS SCHOOL AND ORS.

2007 INSC 12416 December 2007Dismissed

The petitioners, an unaided school governed by the Delhi School Education Act, challenged the Election Commission’s practice of deploying teachers from government schools for election‑related duties during school hours, alleging that it disrupted education and violated the right to education. The Delhi High Court had d

MERCYKUTTY AMMAversusKADAVOOR SIVADASAN AND ANR.

2003 INSC 6106 November 2003Disposed off

The appellant contested the election of the respondent from the Kundara Legislative Assembly constituency and filed an election petition alleging that the respondent had committed corrupt practices under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 by publishing a defamatory pamphlet through agents K.C. Ma

DEVENDRA PATELversusRAM PAL SINGH & ORS.

2013 INSC 5926 September 2013

The appellant challenged the rejection of Jaswant Singh's nomination, arguing that despite being disqualified, he should be treated as a 'candidate' under Section 79(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and thus be joined as a respondent under Section 82(b) of the same Act in an election petition alleging c

R. NARAYANANversusS. SEMMALAI AND ORS.

1979 INSC 1726 September 1979Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1977 Tamil Nadu Assembly election for the Taramangalam constituency, R. Narayanan was declared elected by a narrow margin of about 19 votes. S. Semmalai filed an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 alleging counting irregularities and seeking a recount and declaration of his own el

PONNALA LAKSHMALAHversusKOMMURI PRATAP REDDY & ORS.

2012 INSC 2746 July 2012Dismissed

The appellant, a returned candidate, appealed a High Court order that refused to dismiss an election petition filed by the respondent alleging irregularities in vote counting. The Supreme Court examined whether the petition disclosed a cause of action and could be struck out at the threshold, and whether the lack of an

K.K. RAMACHANDRAN MASTERversusM.V. SREYAMAKUMAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 3586 July 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K.K. Ramachandran Master, filed an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 challenging the election of M.V. Sreyam Kumar on grounds of corrupt practices alleged under Sections 123(4), 123(5) and 123(6). The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that it failed to disclose m

A. RAJAversusD. KUMAR

2025 INSC 6296 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, A. Raja, contested and won the Devikulam Assembly seat, a constituency reserved for Scheduled Castes, by filing a nomination stating he belonged to the Hindu Parayan caste, supported by a caste certificate. The respondent challenged the election, alleging that the appellant's paternal grandparents migrat

KAILASHversusNANHKU AND ORS.

2005 INSC 1866 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kailash, elected to the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Council, challenged a High Court order that refused to accept his written statement filed after the 90‑day limit prescribed by Order VIII, Rule I of the CPC. The Supreme Court examined when the trial of an election petition begins, whether the CPC time‑li

M. J. JACOBversusA. NARAYANAN & ORS.

2009 INSC 3396 March 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The Kerala High Court set aside M.J. Jacob's election on the ground that a pamphlet published on his behalf contained a false statement that was held to be about the personal character of his rival, T.M. Jacob, constituting a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Supre

CHHEDI RAMversusJHILMIT RAM & OTHERS

1983 INSC 1895 December 1983Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1979 Uttar Pradesh Vidhan Sabha election for a Scheduled Caste reserved seat, Jhilmit Ram was declared elected by a margin of 373 votes over Chhedi Ram. A third candidate, Moti Ram, whose caste status made him ineligible for the reserved constituency, had his nomination improperly accepted and secured 6,110 vote

S. ANBALAGANversusB. DEVARAJAN & ORS.

1983 INSC 1905 December 1983Dismissed

The appellant S. Anbalagan challenged the election of B. Devarajan, who had been elected from a Lok Sabha seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, on the ground that Devarajan was a Christian by birth and therefore not a member of the Scheduled Caste. The Election Tribunal held that Devarajan was a Hindu Adi Dravida, had re

RUPADHAR PUJARIversusGANGADHAR BHATRA

2004 INSC 5745 October 2004Leave Granted & Dismissed

In the Pondosguda Gram Panchayat election for Sarpanch, the respondent was declared elected but was later found disqualified under the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act for having more than two children. The appellant filed an election petition seeking to have the respondent's election declared void and to be declared the so

N. C. ZELIANGversusAJU NEWMAI & 2 ORS

1980 INSC 1735 September 1980Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1977 Nagaland Assembly election, N.C. Zeliang was declared elected but the defeated candidate Aju Newmai filed an election petition alleging that Zeliang committed corrupt practices by filing a false expense return and exceeding the permissible election expenditure limit, as well as by holding feasts to induce v

NITIN BANDOPANT SALAGREversusTHE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION & ANR.

2019 INSC 8595 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2017 municipal elections for Ward 76 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation, the elected councillor was later disqualified after her caste certificate was invalidated. This created a casual vacancy. The appellant, who had secured the second‑highest number of votes, claimed he should be deemed elected under Section 

S. SUBRAMANIAM BALAJIversusTHE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2013 INSC 4445 July 2013Dismissed

The appellant challenged the Tamil Nadu government's distribution of free colour television sets, laptops, mixers, and other welfare items promised in the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) election manifesto, alleging that the expenditure was unauthorized, violated Article 14 and amounted to a corrupt practice under Sect

ASHOK SHANKARRAO CHAVANversusDR. MADHAVRAO KINHALKAR & ORS.

2014 INSC 9705 May 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered three appeals challenging orders of the Election Commission that disqualified elected candidates under Section 1OA of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for allegedly failing to lodge true and correct accounts of election expenses. The Court examined the statutory scheme, the Conduc

NAYINI NARASIMHA REDDYversusDR. K. LAXMAN AND ORS.

2006 INSC 2955 May 2006Dismissed

In the 2004 Musheerabad Assembly election, the appellant N. Narasimha Reddy lost by 240 votes and the respondent Dr. K. Laxman filed an election petition challenging the result. The petition sought summons of several voters as witnesses, alleging that their testimony was essential to prove that the appellant could not

VIJAY BAHADURversusSUNIL KUMAR & ORS.

2025 INSC 3325 March 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Vijay Bahadur contested the election of Gram Pradhan in Chaka village, alleging a discrepancy of 19 votes between the Presiding Officer’s oral statement (1194 votes) and Form 46 (1213 votes) and claiming irregularities such as missing poll‑booth diaries and police interference. He filed an election petiti

P.H PUJARversusKANTHI RAJASHEKHAR KIDIYAPPA AND ORS.

2002 INSC 1175 March 2002Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was elected to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly by a margin of 138 votes. The defeated candidate filed an election petition under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging that the counting supervisors failed to fill the required check memos, that ballot papers were improperly r

MOTI RAMversusPARAM DEV AND ANR.

1993 INSC 835 March 1993Dismissed

In the 1990 Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election from Chachiot, Motiram was declared elected. The election was challenged on the ground that the nomination of another candidate, Karam Singh, had been improperly rejected because he was alleged to hold an office of profit as Chairman of the Himachal Pradesh Kha

A.C. JOSEversusSIVAN PILLAI & ORS.

1984 INSC 525 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

A.C. Jose, a losing candidate in a Kerala Legislative Assembly election, challenged the election of Sivan Pillai on the ground that votes cast by electronic voting machines in 50 of 85 polling stations were illegal. The Election Commission had issued a notification permitting the use of machines, but the Representation

TUKARAM S. DIGHOLEversusMANIKRAO SHIVAJI KOKATE

2010 INSC 815 February 2010Dismissed

Tukaram S. Digole, who lost a Lok Sabha election, filed an election petition alleging that Manikrao Shivaji Kokate had made communal appeals in violation of Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Digole sought to prove the allegation by producing a VHS cassette he claimed was a certified copy fro

S. BALDEV SINGH MANNversusS. GURCHARAN SINGH, MLA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 1795 February 1996Dismissed

The appellant, S. Baldev Singh Mann, filed an election petition challenging the 1992 Punjab Legislative Assembly election of S. Gurcharan Singh (respondent No.1) on grounds of booth capturing and overspending. He alleged that the respondent and his agents threatened the appellant's polling agent and exceeded the permis

RAMA KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA

1993 INSC 445 February 1993Dismissed

The petitioner challenged two 1992 Ordinances that amended the Representation of the People Act, 1951 – narrowing the counter‑manding provision in Section 52 to only candidates of recognised political parties who die, and reducing the minimum interval between the withdrawal of nominations and polling from twenty to fou

BORGARAM DEURIversusPREMODHAR BORA AND ANR.

2004 INSC 85 January 2004Dismissed

In the 2001 Assam Legislative Assembly election, the respondent Premodhar Bora was declared elected. The petitioner, Borgaram Deur!, filed an election petition alleging that Bora and his agents committed corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, by urging voters

SULTAN SADIQversusSANJAY RAJ SUBBA AND ORS.

2004 INSC 185 January 2004Appeal(s) allowed

Sultan Sadiq, who had been rendering voluntary services as an assistant teacher in a madrasa, contested a legislative assembly election. The first respondent challenged his election alleging that Sadiq held an office of profit under the State of Assam because his services were purportedly regularized by a government or

DR. VIJAY LAXMI SADHOversusJAGDISH

2001 INSC 95 January 2001Dismissed

In the 1998 Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, the appellant was declared elected and the defeated respondent filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices. The petition and its supporting affidavit were drafted in Hindi, contrary to the High Court Rule requiring English, and the affidavit was not in

P.C. THOMASversusP.M. ISMAIL & ORS.

2009 INSC 11094 September 2009Dismissed

In the 2004 Lok Sabha election for Muvattupuzha, P.C. Thomas was declared elected by a narrow margin. The election petitioner, P.M. Ismail, challenged the result alleging that Thomas had committed corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 by printing and circulatin

SATRUCHARLA CHANDRASEKHAR RAJUversusVYRICHERLA PRADEEP KUMAR DEV AND ANR.

1992 INSC 2364 September 1992Appeal(s) allowed

Satrucharla Raju was appointed as a single teacher in a primary school run by the Integrated Tribal Development Agency (ITDA), a registered society. He was suspended pending an enquiry, tendered his resignation on 26 October 1989 (which was not accepted), and subsequently filed his nomination and was elected to the And

KANIMOZHI KARUNANIDHIversusA. SANTHANA KUMAR & ORS

2023 INSC 4994 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition filed under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which alleged that the returned candidate, Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, had suppressed her spouse's PAN and income‑tax details in Form 26. The Court held that the petition contained only vague, bal

CHAUGULEversusBHAGWAT

2012 INSC 1624 April 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly. An independent candidate, Y, filed an election petition challenging the rejection of his nomination paper, but later withdrew the petition. Within fourteen days, Bhagwat, who had not contested the election, applied under Section 110(3)(c) of the Represe

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAIversusM/S. VIRGO STEELS, BOMBAY AND ANR.

2002 INSC 1824 April 2002Dismissed

The Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai initiated recovery proceedings against Mis. Virgo Steels and Associated Cement Company Ltd for duty‑free steel imported after the cement project was abandoned, in violation of the Deemed Export Scheme. Virgo Steels admitted the illegality in a letter, expressly waived its right to a

ARIKALA NARASA REDDYversusVENKATA RAM REDDY REDDYGARI & ANR.

2014 INSC 764 February 2014Disposed off

The 2009 Legislative Council election for Nizamabad saw a narrow result, leading the defeated candidate to file an election petition alleging wrongful rejection of three votes and wrongful acceptance of one vote. The appellant, who had been declared elected, filed a recrimination petition under Section 97 of the Repres

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAversusTELEANGANA RASTRA SAMITHI & ANR.

2010 INSC 8483 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Twelve members of the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly resigned to press for a separate Telangana state, creating twelve casual vacancies. The Election Commission of India (ECI) announced bye‑elections for ten clear vacancies but withheld elections for two constituencies where election petitions under Section 84 of

VIKAS YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 9433 October 2016Disposed off

The appellants Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav and Sukhdev Yadav were convicted of murder, kidnapping and related offences (IPC ss.302, 364, 34, 201) and sentenced to life imprisonment with additional fixed‑term sentences. The State appealed for enhancement of the life sentence to death; the High Court instead imposed a fixe

MANGE RAMversusBRIJ MOHAN AND OTHERS

1983 INSC 873 August 1983Appeal(s) allowed

Mange Ram, the petitioner, challenged the election of Brij Mohan to the Haryana Legislative Assembly by filing an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. During the trial he sought to examine a large number of witnesses he had kept present in court, but whose names were not included in the l

ISHWARDAS ROHANIversusALOK MISHRA & ORS.

2012 INSC 1983 May 2012Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, a returned candidate, challenged an election petition filed by the respondent alleging corrupt practices under Sections 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court, despite noting deficiencies in the petition, directed the respondent to amend the pleadings and verify them, rather th

DR. SMT. SHIPRAversusSHANTI LAL KHOIWAL

1996 INSC 4773 April 1996Dismissed

Dr. SMT. Shipra filed an election petition challenging the election of S.L. Khotwal on grounds of corrupt practices. The petition and its supporting affidavit were served on the returned candidate, but the copy of the affidavit omitted the notarized verification required by Form 25 under Rule 94‑A of the Conduct of Ele

KAUSHAL KISHORversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2023 INSC 43 January 2023Reference answered

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 113 of 2016 and Special Leave Petition (Diary) No. 34629 of 2017 were referred to a Constitution Bench to answer five questions concerning the scope of freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) and the enforceability of fundamental rights against non-State actors. The petitions arose from st

MAKHAN LAL BANGALversusMANAS BHUNIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 13 January 2001Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a defeated candidate, filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly on grounds of corrupt practices under Sections 123(2), (4) and (7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Calcutta High Court found several persons guilty of suc

BASHIR MUSA PATELversusSATYAWAN GANPAT .JAWKAR AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14262 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices by the appellant, Bashir Musa Patel, under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition was found to lack the specific particulars required by Section 86(5) of the Act. The Bombay High Court, while acknowledging the deficiency, directed t

ROOP LAL SINGHversusNACHHATTAR SINGH

1982 INSC 802 November 1982Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Roop Lal challenged the election of Nachhattar Singh to the Punjab Legislative Assembly on the ground that the Election Commission’s re‑allocation of the party symbol ‘hand’ to the respondent violated the Election Symbols (Reservation & Allotment) Order, 1968 and the provisions of the Representation of th

POTHULA RAMA RAOversusPENDYALA VENKATA KRISHNA RAO AND ORS.

2007 INSC 8042 August 2007Dismissed

The appellant, a voter, filed an election petition seeking to declare the election of the first respondent, a legislator, void on four grounds: improper rejection of a dummy candidate’s nomination, acceptance of the respondent’s nomination despite a double entry in the electoral roll, acceptance of a Bahujan Samaj Part

BIRAD MAL SINGHVIversusANAND PUROHIT

1988 INSC 1982 August 1988Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition challenging the election of B.M. Singhvi from the Jodhpur City Assembly constituency. The petition alleged that three candidates – Umrao Ben, Hukmi Chand and Suraj Prakash Joshi – were improperly rejected, contending that Ben’s nomination should have been accepted despite

UNION OF INDIAversusASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR.

2002 INSC 2532 May 2002Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Election Commission could be directed to require candidates to disclose criminal cases, assets, liabilities and educational qualifications, as ordered by the Delhi High Court, despite the absence of a specific provision in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or the Conduct

MANMOHAN KALIAversusYASH & OTHERS

1984 INSC 742 April 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the 1980 Assembly election for Jullundur Cantt., where the appellant, Manmohan Kaula, lost to respondent Yash by a narrow margin. Kaula alleged that Yash and his agents committed a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, by publishing false statements link

ANOOP BARANWALversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 1902 March 2023Case Partly allowed

The writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the practice of appointing the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) solely by the executive. The Supreme Court examined Article 324(2) and Constituent Assembly debates, concluding that Parliament was intended to enact a law gover

JITU PATNAIKversusSANATAN MOHAKUD & ORS.

2012 INSC 1232 March 2012Appeal(s) allowed

In the 25‑Champua Assembly constituency, an independent candidate died after the withdrawal deadline but before polling, yet his name remained on the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) and he received 550 votes. The election petitioner alleged that, had the deceased candidate’s name been masked, those votes would have gon

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2023 INSC 942 February 2023Dismissed

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which allows a candidate to contest elections from more than one constituency for the same office simultaneously. He argued that the provision violated Ar

MARKIO TADOversusTAKAM SORANG & ORS.

2012 INSC 702 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Markio Tado, was elected to the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly and the respondent, Takam Sorang, filed an election petition alleging booth capturing. During the trial the respondent sought, via two interlocutory applications, production of voters' counterfoils (Form 17A) from 38 polling stations

ABHIRAM SINGHversusC.D. COMMACHEN (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.

2017 INSC 32 January 2017

The Supreme Court was asked to interpret Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, specifically the meaning of the pronoun "his" and whether the provision bars appeals based on religion, race, caste, community or language of the candidate, rival candidate, or the voter. The majority, led by Justice

MITHILESH KUMAR PANDEYversusBAIDYANATH YADAV AND ORS .

1984 INSC 12 January 1984Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1980 Bihar assembly election, M.K. Pandey was declared elected and the defeated Baidyanath filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices. The petition copy served on Pandey contained numerous errors, including omitted and incorrect names of alleged perpetrators. Pandey argued that the mandatory requireme

JOSEPH M. PUTHUSSERYversusT.S. JOHN & ORS.

2010 INSC 8411 December 2010Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Joseph M. Puthussery, was elected to the Kerala Legislative Assembly in 2001. Respondent T.S. John filed an election petition alleging that the appellant committed a corrupt practice under s.123(4) of the Representation of the People Act by distributing a pamphlet (Ext. X4) containing false statements ab

L.R. SHIVARAMAGOWDA ETC.versusT.M. CHANDRASHEKAR (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

1998 INSC 4471 December 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined two civil appeals arising from an election petition that sought to void the election of L.R. Shivaramagowda on grounds of alleged corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition alleged that the returned candidate had failed to file true and correct accounts o

ASHWINI KUMAR SHARMAversusYADUVANSH SINGH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 7741 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1995 Vidhan Sabha election for the Lakhisarai constituency, respondent No.1 was declared elected. The appellant, Ashwini Kumar Sharma, filed an election petition under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging irregularities and illegalities in the counting of votes, includin

SATISH UKEYversusDEVENDRA GANGADHARRAO FADNAVIS AND ANR.

2019 INSC 11031 October 2019Appeal(s) allowed

Satish Ukey filed a criminal complaint under Section 125-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 alleging that MLA Devendra Fadnavis concealed two criminal cases in his Form‑26 affidavit, where cognizance had been taken by the courts. The trial court dismissed the complaint, a Sessions Court remanded it for fre

PUKHREM SHARATCHANDRA SINGHversusMAIREMBAM PRITHVIRAJ@ PRITHIBIRAJ SINGH

2015 INSC 7261 October 2015Disposed off

The appellant, Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh, filed an election petition challenging the 2012 election of the respondent, Mairembam Prithviraj, on grounds of a forged affidavit and procedural irregularities. The respondent delayed filing his written statement for two years and repeatedly sought adjournments, filing numer

K. PRABHAKARANversusP. JAYARAJAN

2002 INSC 4151 October 2002Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant K. Prabhakaran challenged the election of P. Jayarajan, who had been convicted of several offences and sentenced to 29 months of imprisonment, on the ground of disqualification under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The trial court had ordered the sentences to run consecutively, ma

LACHMAN DAS ARORAversusGANESHI LAL AND ORS

1999 INSC 3731 September 1999Dismissed

The appellant, Lachman Das Arora, who lost the Sirsa Assembly election held on 10 May 1996, filed an election petition on 1 July 1996 challenging the election of Ganeshi Lal. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 mandates that such petitions be presented within 45 days of the election. The 45‑day period expired du

MOHD. ALIversusAZAD MOHD.

1999 INSC 3741 September 1999Dismissed

The appellant filed an election petition on July 1, 1996, the first day after the Punjab and Haryana High Court resumed from its summer vacation, although the 45‑day limitation period had expired during the vacation. The High Court, relying on a November 27, 1995 notification that the court was not "closed" for electio

GADNIS BHAWANI SHANKARversusFALEIRO EDUARDO MARTINHO

2000 INSC 3651 August 2000Dismissed

In a Rajya Sabha election, three candidates filed nominations; one candidate, Luis Alex Cardozo, withdrew his candidature before the election. The appellant filed an election petition alleging that Cardozo, after withdrawal, agreed to receive gratification to vote for the respondent, constituting a corrupt practice und

I. VIKHESHE SEMAversusHOKISHE SEMA

1996 INSC 6011 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

In the 1993 Nagaland Legislative Assembly election for Dimapur Constituency No.1, Vikheshe Sema was declared winner by a margin of 137 votes over Hokishe Sema. The respondent filed an election petition alleging that duplicate entries in the electoral roll had allowed some voters to cast more than one vote, thereby mate

JAIPAL SINGHversusSMT. SUMITRA MAHAJAN AND ANR.

2004 INSC 2211 April 2004Dismissed

Jaipal Singh, an IAS officer, applied for voluntary retirement on 13 March 2002 and requested a waiver of the three‑month notice period required under the All India Services (Death‑cum‑Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958. He filed nomination papers for the Rajya Sabha election from Haryana, but the Returning Officer rejec

ERA SEZHIYANversusT.R. BALU AND ORS.

1990 INSC 711 March 1990Dismissed

In a 1986 Rajya Sabha election by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, the appellant, Era Sezhiyan, lost and challenged the rejection of one ballot paper marked with green ink (a pen different from the blue‑ink pen supplied in the booth) and the acceptance of three ballots where the figure ‘1’ was placed in the wrong c

MANGANI LAL MANDALversusBISHNU DEO BHANDARI

2012 INSC 641 February 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The voter Bishnu Deo Bhandari filed an election petition challenging the Lok Sabha election of Mangani Lal Mandal on the ground that Mandal had omitted information about his first wife, dependent children and their assets in the affidavit filed with his nomination papers. The Patna High Court set aside Mandal's electio

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search