Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Representation of the People Act, 1951

107 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

JEEVAN CHANDRABHAN IDNANI & ANR.versusDIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, KONKAN BHAVAN & ORS.

2012 INSC 5631 January 2012Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the formation of a post‑poll "aghadi" (front) by councillors of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation after municipal elections. The petitioners argued that the second proviso to sub‑section (2) of Section 31A of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 allows the creation of an aghadi or

ASHRAF KOKKURversusK.V. ABDUL KHADER ETC.

2014 INSC 57529 August 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, K.V. Abdul Khader, was Chairperson of the Kerala State Wakf Board and was elected to the Kerala Legislative Assembly. The appellant, Ashraf Kokkurr, filed an election petition alleging that the respondent was disqualified under Article 191(1)(a) of the Constitution because he held an office of profit. T

MOHAMMAD SADIQUEversusDARBARA SINGH GURU

2016 INSC 35529 April 2016Appeal(s) allowed

In the 2012 Punjab Legislative Assembly election, Mohammad Sadique was elected from the Bhadaur constituency, which is reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC). The election petitioner, Darbara Singh Guru, challenged Sadique's election on the ground that Sadique, being born to Muslim parents, could not claim SC status and th

SRI MAIREMBAM PRITHVIRAJ @ PR!THVIRAJ SINGH .versusSHRI PUKHREM SHARATCHANDRA SINGH

2016 INSC 100028 October 2016Dismissed

The appellant, elected as MLA from Moirang constituency, was challenged by the respondent on the ground that the appellant had falsely declared an MBA degree in Form 26, constituting a false declaration of educational qualification. The High Court held the false declaration to be a substantial defect and declared the a

ASHISH SHELAR & ORS.versusTHE MAHARASHTRA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY & ANR.

2022 INSC 11628 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, twelve BJP MLAs, were suspended for one year by a resolution of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly after a heated monsoon session. They challenged the resolution under Articles 14, 21 and 190(4) of the Constitution, arguing that the suspension exceeded the period allowed by Rule 53 of the Assembly Ru

PEOPLE'S UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 65527 September 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by People's Union for Civil Liberties and others challenging Rules 41(2), 41(3) and 49‑0 of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, which required a presiding officer to record a remark and obtain the voter’s signature/thumb impression when the voter chose not to cast a

MANOJ NARULAversusUNION OF INDIA

2014 INSC 56827 August 2014Disposed off

The petition challenged the appointment of several Union Ministers on the ground that they had criminal antecedents or were facing charges for serious offences, seeking a declaration that such appointments were unconstitutional and requesting the Court to frame guidelines for ministerial appointments. The Court examine

P.A. MOHAMMED RIYASversusM.K. RAGHAVAN & ORS.

2012 INSC 19227 April 2012Dismissed

The appellant, P.A. Mohammed Riyas, contested the 2009 Lok Sabha election from Kozhikode and filed an election petition alleging that the respondent, M.K. Raghavan, committed corrupt practice by publishing false statements, invoking Sections 81, 100, 101 and 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petiti

LOK PRAHARIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS

2023 INSC 30227 March 2023Dismissed

Lok Prahari, a society, challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 39-AA of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 and the proviso to Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging violations of Article 80(4), Article 14 of the Constitution and Section 123(2) of the Act. The petitioner argued that

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 17427 February 2023Dismissed

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a court order directing the Home Ministry to set up a Renaming Commission, the Archaeological Survey of India to research original names, and governments to update records of ancient religious sites renamed during foreign invasions, invoking rights t

NAVJOT SINGH SIDHUversusOM PARKASH SONI & ORS.

2016 INSC 99026 October 2016Case Partly allowed

The 2009 Lok Sabha election for Amritsar was challenged in an election petition alleging three categories of corrupt practice: excess election expenditure on newspaper advertisements, excessive spending on public meetings, and assistance from a gazetted officer, along with a grievance about the Returning Officer's hand

K. MADAN MOHAN RAOversusBHEEMRAO BASWANTHRAO PATIL & ORS.

2022 INSC 102526 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

K. Madan Mohan Rao filed an election petition (No.34/2019) in the Telangana High Court and moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC seeking exemption from filing the impugned order. After a prolonged hearing, the High Court pronounced an order on 15 June 2022 allowing the application and rejecting the el

PATEL AHMED MOHAMMADversusBALWANT SINGH RAJPUT & ORS.

2018 INSC 88726 September 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

Patel Ahmed Mohammad, a Rajya Sabha member, was challenged by Balwant Singh Rajput in an election petition alleging corrupt practices and vote irregularities. The appellant filed three applications for dismissal of the petition: (i) on the basis that office objections under Gujarat High Court Rules were not removed (Ap

ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAYversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2022 INSC 87526 August 2022Directions issued

The petitioners challenged pre‑election promises of free goods (“freebies”) made by political parties, arguing that such promises strain state finances and violate the spirit of free and fair elections. They sought judicial intervention, contending that the promises amount to corrupt practices under Section 123 of the

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMSversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 34126 April 2024Disposed off

The Association for Democratic Reforms challenged the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) with VVPAT, seeking a return to paper ballots, physical hand‑over of VVPAT slips to voters, and 100% VVPAT counting, alleging possible manipulation. The Supreme Court examined the technical architecture of EVMs, the safeguard

PUBLIC INTEREST FOUNDATION & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2018 INSC 86225 September 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether it could compel Parliament to enact a law disqualifying candidates against whom serious criminal charges have been framed and whether it could direct the Election Commission to deny such candidates the use of a party's reserved symbol. The Court held that disqualification is a matter

KUNGA NIMA LEPCHA & ORS.versusSTATE OF SIKKIM & ORS.

2010 INSC 16625 March 2010Dismissed

Four members of a political party filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution alleging that the Chief Minister of Sikkim had amassed assets disproportionate to his known income and misappropriated public funds. They sought a mandamus directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to launch

TEJ BAHADURversusSHRI NARENDRA MODI

2020 INSC 65524 November 2020Dismissed

Tej Bahadur, a former Border Security Force officer dismissed in 2017, filed an election petition challenging Narendra Modi's election to the Lok Sabha from Varanasi, alleging his own nomination was wrongly rejected and the election was vitiated. He had filed two nomination papers in April 2019 but failed to attach the

BHIM RAO BASWANTH RAO PATILversusK. MADAN MOHAN RAO AND ORS.

2023 INSC 64124 July 2023Dismissed

Bhima Rao Baswanth Rao Patil, a successful Lok Sabha candidate, was challenged by K. Madan Mohan Rao through an election petition under Sections 81 and 84 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, alleging false information, non‑disclosure of pending criminal cases and convictions, and non‑compliance with Election

KULDEEP SINGH PATHANIAversusBIKRAM SINGH JARYAL

2017 INSC 7324 January 2017Appeal(s) allowed

Kuldeep Singh Pathania, who lost a 2012 Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly election, filed an election petition under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 alleging irregularities in voting and postal ballots. The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition on preliminary ground

KALYAN SINGH CHOUHANversusC.P. JOSHI

2011 INSC 6624 January 2011Dismissed

The appellant Kalyan Singh Chouhan, declared elected by a margin of one vote in the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly election, challenged the High Court's order rejecting his application to summon all ten tendered votes, arguing that the entire set should be examined to prevent miscarriage of justice. The respondent C.P.

AJAY ARJUN SINGHversusSHARADENDU TIWARI & OTHERS

2016 INSC 119423 August 2016Case Partly allowed

The appellant, a returned MLA, challenged an election petition alleging corrupt practices and excess expenditure under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. He filed an application under Order VI Rule 16 of the CPC seeking to strike out several paragraphs of the petition as frivolous, scandalous or vexatious. The

DHEERAJ MORversusHON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

2018 INSC 4623 January 2018

The petitioners challenged the interpretation of Article 233 of the Constitution concerning the eligibility criteria for appointment of District Judges by direct recruitment. They argued that a candidate who has completed seven years of practice as an advocate should remain eligible even if he/she is in Union or State

GOVIND SINGHversusHARCHAND KAUR

2010 INSC 79822 November 2010Appeal(s) allowed

Govind Singh, a former Social Security Minister, resigned on 12 January 2002 and filed his nomination as an independent candidate on 23 January 2002. He was elected MLA from the Sherpur (SC) constituency on 13 February 2002. The defeated candidate, Harchand Kaur, filed an election petition alleging that Singh had indul

TANKADHAR TRIPATHYversusDIPALI DAS

2025 INSC 101722 August 2025

The appellant, Tankadhar Tripathy, was elected from the Jharsuguda Assembly Constituency, after which the respondent, Dipali Das, filed an election petition alleging corrupt practices and EVM irregularities. The appellant challenged the petition's maintainability, arguing that the petition lacked a Form 25 affidavit as

MD. ALAUDDIN KHANversusKARAM THAMARJIT SINGH

2010 INSC 41822 July 2010Matter referred to larger bench

The election for the 9th Manipur Legislative Assembly was won by MD Alauddin Khan by a margin of two votes over Karam Thamarjit Singh, who filed an election petition under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) alleging impersonation of dead voters in certain polling stations and seeking a recount and declaration of the election as vo

MOHD. TAHIR HUSSAINversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI

2025 INSC 10022 January 2025

Mohd. Tahir Hussain, an under‑trial accused in multiple FIRs including rioting and the murder of an IB official, has been in custody since March 2020 and sought interim bail to contest and campaign in the 2025 Delhi Assembly elections. The Delhi High Court allowed only a custodial parole for filing his nomination, prom

SUMAN DEVIversusMANISHA DEVI AND ORS.

2018 INSC 73021 August 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant was declared elected as Ward Councilor on 28 January 2016. The first respondent filed an election petition under Section 176 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act on 10 February 2016, withdrew it on 1 March 2016 and was given liberty to file a fresh petition, which she did on 2 March 2016—beyond the 30‑day pe

DASANGLU PULversusLUPALUM KRI

2023 INSC 93019 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a third wife of a deceased MLA from the Mishmi tribe, filed a nomination for a 2019 assembly election and marked ‘not applicable’ in Form‑26 for the spouse‑property column. The respondent challenged the nomination, alleging non‑disclosure of the deceased husband’s assets, which he claimed constituted a s

YENDAPALLI SRINIVASULU REDDYversusVEMIREDDY PATTABHIRAMI REDDY & ORS.

2022 INSC 112019 October 2022Dismissed

The appellant, a returned candidate, challenged an election petition filed by the respondent that alleged improper acceptance of his nomination and mishandling of votes. The respondent later sought to amend the petition to include allegations that the appellant had failed to disclose a pending criminal case in his Form

SENTHIBALAJI VversusA.P. GEETHA AND ORS

2023 INSC 57119 May 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a duly elected MLA, challenged an election petition filed by the first respondent that alleged improper acceptance of his nomination papers and corrupt practices. The petition relied on representations to the Returning Officer and alleged misuse of government vehicles and suppression of Election Commissi

PRADEEP KUMAR SONTHALIAversusDHIRAJ PRASAD SAHU @ DHIRAJ SAHU & ANR.

2020 INSC 71018 December 2020Disposed off

In the biennial Rajya Sabha election from Jharkhand, MLA Amit Kumar Mahto cast his vote at 9:15 a.m. on 23 March 2018, but was convicted later that afternoon. The petitioner, Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia, challenged the validity of that vote, arguing that the conviction rendered Mahto disqualified under Article 191(1)(e) of

ANVAR P.V.versusP.K. BASHEER AND ORS.

2014 INSC 64518 September 2014Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined an election petition challenging the election of P.K. Basheer on the ground that a leaflet (Exhibit‑P1) and various audio‑visual recordings were published to malign the petitioner, Anvar P.V., constituting a corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Court held tha

DESIYA MURPOKKU DRAVIDA KAZHAGAM & ANR.versusTHE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

2012 INSC 17618 April 2012Dismissed

The petitioners, including Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam, challenged the constitutional validity of the 2000 amendment to the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, which required a political party to secure at least 6% of the state's valid votes and win at least two legislative seats to be recogn

KALYAN KUMAR GOGOIversusASHUTOSH AGNIHOTRI AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 5718 January 2011Dismissed

In the 2006 Assam Legislative Assembly election, polling station No.124 was initially set up at a non‑notified school and later shifted to the notified venue. The defeated candidate, Kalyan Kumar Gogoi, alleged that this change caused chaos, preventing 200‑300 voters from casting their votes and materially affected the

IN RE : SECTION 6A OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT 1955 versus

2024 INSC 78917 October 2024Reference answered

The case concerns the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam based on cut-off dates (before 1.1.1966 and between 1.1.1966 and 25.3.1971). The provision was enacted to implement the Assam Accord. Petitioners challenged it

DESIYA MURPOKKU DRAVIDA KAZHAGAM AND ANR.versusTHE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

2011 INSC 21216 March 2011Hearing Adjourned

The Supreme Court examined eleven writ petitions and three special leave petitions filed by registered unrecognised political parties seeking a common election symbol for the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly elections. The parties challenged several provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968

LOK PRAHARI, THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY S. N. SHUKLAversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 784 OF 2015 FEBRUARY 16, 2018

2018 INSC 16416 February 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Lok Prahari, a registered society, filed a writ petition alleging that several members of Parliament and State Legislatures had amassed assets disproportionate to their known sources of income, seeking greater transparency and possible disqualification. The Court examined whether undue accretion of assets could be made

AJAY ARJUN SLNGHversusSHARADENDU TIWARI & OTHERS

2016 INSC 26415 March 2016Disposed off

The case concerned an election petition filed by Sharadendu Tiwari challenging the election of Ajay Arjun Singh. The dispute centered on whether the petition was accompanied by an affidavit in the statutory Form 25 as required by the proviso to Section 83(1)(c) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and whether

ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 11315 February 2024

The Supreme Court of India struck down the Electoral Bond Scheme and related amendments to the Finance Act 2017, which had introduced anonymous financial contributions to political parties. The Court held that the scheme violated the right to information of voters under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, as informat

KAPIL MUNI KARWARIYAversusCHANDRA NARAIN TRIPATHI

2012 INSC 9215 February 2012Dismissed

In the 51‑Phulpur Lok Sabha election, Kapil Muni Karwaria was declared elected after the Returning Officer rejected Chandra Narain Tripathi's nomination for lacking the required ten proposers under Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, because the second proposer, Pramod Kumar, had been deleted from

AFJAL ANSARIversusSTATE OF UP

2023 INSC 107114 December 2023Case Partly allowed

Afzal Ansari, a sitting Member of Parliament, was convicted under Section 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti‑Social Activities (Prevention) Act and sentenced to four years' imprisonment, resulting in his disqualification from the Lok Sabha under Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act. He appealed t

AJMERA SHYAMversusSMT. KOVA LAXMI & ORS.

2025 INSC 99214 August 2025Dismissed

The appellant, Ajmera Shyam, challenged the election of Smt. Kova Laxmi, alleging that she failed to disclose income shown in her income‑tax returns for four financial years in the Form 26 affidavit, marking it as “Nil”. The High Court dismissed the election petition, holding that the omission was not a substantial def

ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKARversusKAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL AND ORS.

2020 INSC 45314 July 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Arjun Panditrao Khotkar, was elected to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly but his election was challenged on the ground that two of his nomination papers were filed after the statutory deadline. The High Court relied on video recordings of the Returning Officer's office, produced by the Election Commi

SHRIMANTH BALASAHEB PATILversusHON’BLE SPEAKER, KARNATAKA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND OTHERS

2019 INSC 123713 November 2019Disposed off

The petitioners, elected members of the 15th Karnataka Legislative Assembly, tendered resignations after being accused of defying party whips, but the Speaker rejected their resignations and disqualified them under the Tenth Schedule, imposing a ban lasting until the end of the Assembly term. The Supreme Court examined

KIMNEO HAOKIP HANGSHINGversusKENN RAIKHAN & ORS.

2024 INSC 68913 September 2024Dismissed

The appellant, a Member of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, was elected from the Saikul constituency in 2022. The respondent filed an election petition alleging that the appellant concealed assets worth about Rs. 2 crore and falsified her income, thereby committing corrupt practices. The appellant moved an application

RESURGENCE INDIAversusELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ANR.

2013 INSC 61713 September 2013Disposed off

Resurgence India, an NGO, observed that many candidates in the 2007 Punjab Legislative Assembly elections filed affidavits with blank entries for criminal, asset and educational details, violating the spirit of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petition sought a direction that Returning Officers must reje

P.H. PAUL MANOJ PANDIANversusMR. P. VELDURAI

2011 INSC 29513 April 2011Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant challenged the election of the respondent on the ground that the respondent had subsisting government contracts at the time of filing his nomination papers, which under Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 renders a candidate disqualified. The dispute turned on the validity of the term

NIDHI KAIMversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS ETC.

2017 INSC 13112 May 2016Directions issued

The appellants, who had secured admission to medical colleges in Madhya Pradesh through the Pre‑Medical Entrance Test (PMT), challenged the cancellation of their results and admissions on the grounds that the Vyapam Board was not validly constituted under the Madhya Pradesh Professional Examination Board Act, 2007 and

KODIKUNNIL SURESH @ J. MONIANversusN.S. SAJI KUMAR, ETC. ETC.

2011 INSC 39012 May 2011Appeal(s) allowed

Kodikkunnil Suresh was elected from the Mavelikkara Lok Sabha seat reserved for Scheduled Castes. His election was challenged on the ground that he was a Christian and therefore not a member of any Scheduled Caste under the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950. The High Court declared his election void, holding

AJAY MAKENversusADESH KUMAR GUPTA & ANR.

2012 INSC 57711 December 2012Disposed off

The Delhi High Court dismissed an election petition challenging the 2009 Lok Sabha election of Ajay Maken on grounds of alleged corrupt practices. The appellant argued that the petition should be thrown out for (i) the copy served on him not being a true copy under Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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