Case Note & Summary
The judgment pertains to an election petition filed by Khan Mohammed Arif Lallan alias Mohammed Arif (Naseem) Khan challenging the election of Dilip Bhausaheb Lande from the 168 Chandivali Assembly Constituency in the 2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections. The petitioner alleged various irregularities including corrupt practices. However, the respondent No.1 (Dilip Bhausaheb Lande) filed an application under Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 seeking dismissal of the election petition on the ground of non-compliance with Section 81(3) of the Act. The core issue was whether the copies of the election petition and the documents annexed thereto served upon the respondent were 'true copies' as required by Section 81(3). The court examined the copies served and found that several documents were illegible, incomplete, or contained blank spaces. The court held that the requirement of furnishing true copies is mandatory and that the copies served were not true copies. Consequently, the court allowed the application and dismissed the election petition under Section 86(1) of the Act. The court also rejected the petitioner's argument that the defect was curable, holding that non-compliance with Section 81(3) goes to the root of the maintainability of the petition and cannot be cured at a later stage.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Non-compliance with Section 81(3) - Dismissal under Section 86(1) - The election petition was dismissed for non-compliance with Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as the copies of documents served on the respondent were not true copies of the documents filed with the petition. The court held that the requirement of furnishing true copies is mandatory and non-compliance leads to dismissal under Section 86(1) (Paras 1-33). B) Election Law - True Copy - Requirement of Legible and Complete Copies - The court held that a 'true copy' under Section 81(3) must be a copy which is substantially the same as the original, and must be legible and complete. In this case, the copies served were illegible and incomplete, thus not true copies (Paras 10-20). C) Election Law - Dismissal for Non-Compliance - Inherent Power of Court - The court held that the power to dismiss an election petition for non-compliance with Section 81(3) is not discretionary but mandatory under Section 86(1) of the Act. Once non-compliance is established, the court has no option but to dismiss the petition (Paras 21-25).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the election petition is liable to be dismissed under Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for non-compliance with Section 81(3) thereof, specifically for failure to furnish true copies of the documents relied upon in the petition.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and dismissed the election petition under Section 86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for non-compliance with Section 81(3) thereof.
Law Points
- Election petition
- non-compliance
- Section 81(3)
- Section 86(1)
- Representation of the People Act
- 1951
- true copy
- dismissal
- maintainability
