In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court at its Lucknow Bench dismissed an election petition filed by Maneka Sanjay Gandhi challenging the election of Rambhual Nishad, who was declared the winner from the Sultanpur 38-Lok Sabha constituency in the 2024 general elections. The case, titled Election Petition No. 3 of 2024, was filed on July 27, 2024, over a month after the election results were declared on June 6, 2024. Maneka Gandhi, represented by a legal team led by Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, contended that Rambhual Nishad had not disclosed pending criminal cases against him in his election affidavit, rendering his election invalid.
Legal Issues Involved
The central issue in the case revolved around the compliance with Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which mandates that election petitions must be filed within 45 days of the declaration of the election results. The petition, filed 51 days after the results, exceeded this statutory limit. Section 86(1) of the Act further requires that any petition not filed within this timeframe must be dismissed by the court.
Maneka Gandhi’s counsel argued that the evolution of law, particularly the inclusion of Section 33-A in the Act, which mandates candidates to disclose criminal cases against them, should override the rigid timelines prescribed in Section 81. They contended that such non-disclosure violates the electorate’s right to information, a constitutional right, and that the court should consider the merits of the petition regardless of the delay.
Court’s Decision and Observations
The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Justice Rajan Roy, meticulously analyzed the legal framework governing election petitions. The court relied on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Hukumdev Narain Yadav vs. Lalit Narain Mishra (1974) and subsequent judgments that affirmed the mandatory nature of the timelines under Section 81. Justice Roy emphasized that the Representation of the People Act, 1951, is a complete code, and the provisions of the Limitation Act, including the possibility of condoning delays, do not apply to election petitions.
Quoting from the judgment, Justice Roy stated, “The legal position in this regard has been settled…the High Court while hearing an election petition does not function as a Constitutional Court per se nor does it have extraordinary constitutional or inherent powers.” He further noted that unless an election petition is maintainable and not barred by limitation, the merits of the case cannot be considered.
The court dismissed the petition under Section 86(1) of the Act and Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, concluding that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed beyond the statutory period. Justice Roy underscored that the legislative intent behind these provisions was to prevent delays in the disposal of election disputes, which could otherwise undermine the electoral process.
Also Read
The 2024 Lok Sabha elections saw Ram Bhuwal Nishad of the Samajwadi Party defeating Maneka Gandhi by a margin of over 43,000 votes in the Sultanpur constituency. Nishad secured 444,330 votes, while Gandhi garnered 401,156 votes. Following her defeat, Gandhi filed the election petition, accusing Nishad of non-disclosure of all criminal cases against him, which she contended amounted to corrupt practices under election law.
