Case Note & Summary
The present matter arises out of an election petition filed by Sulakshana Raju Dhar (the petitioner) challenging the election of Anna Dadu Bansode (Respondent No. 1) from the 206-Pimpri Assembly Constituency in the Maharashtra State Assembly elections. The petitioner alleged various irregularities in the election process. However, the returned candidate filed an application (Exhibit P-18) seeking dismissal of the election petition on the ground of non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The primary contentions were that the affidavit accompanying the election petition was not properly attested by the Oath Commissioner as required under the Act and the High Court Rules, and that the petitioner failed to serve a copy of the election petition on the returned candidate. The petitioner argued that the defects were curable and that substantial compliance was sufficient. The court, after hearing the parties, examined the provisions of Section 81(3) and Section 83(1) of the RP Act, along with Order 6 Rule 16 and Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The court held that the requirements of Section 81(3) are mandatory and that non-compliance with the attestation requirement and the failure to serve a copy on the returned candidate are fatal defects that cannot be cured. The court relied on the principle that election petitions are special proceedings and strict compliance with the statutory requirements is essential. Consequently, the court allowed the application and dismissed the election petition with costs, holding that the petition was void ab initio.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Mandatory Requirements of Election Petition - Section 81(3) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Attestation of Affidavit - The election petition was accompanied by an affidavit that was not properly attested by the Oath Commissioner as required under the Act and the High Court Rules. The defect was held to be fatal and not curable, rendering the petition void ab initio. (Paras 10-15) B) Election Law - Service of Copy on Returned Candidate - Section 81(3) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - The petitioner failed to serve a copy of the election petition on the returned candidate (Respondent No. 1) as mandated by Section 81(3). The court held that this requirement is mandatory and non-compliance leads to dismissal of the petition under Section 86(1) of the Act. (Paras 16-20) C) Election Law - Defect in Affidavit - Section 83(1) Representation of the People Act, 1951 read with Order 6 Rule 16 and Order 7 Rule 11 CPC - The affidavit accompanying the petition was defective as it was not sworn before the proper authority. The court held that such defect goes to the root of the petition and cannot be cured by amendment. (Paras 21-25) D) Election Law - Dismissal for Non-Compliance - Section 86(1) Representation of the People Act, 1951 - The court held that the election petition is liable to be dismissed at the threshold for non-compliance with the mandatory provisions of Section 81(3) and Section 83(1) of the Act. The petition was dismissed with costs. (Paras 26-30)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an election petition filed under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 81(3) of the Act, specifically regarding the attestation of the affidavit and the failure to serve a copy of the petition on the returned candidate?
Final Decision
The court allowed the application (Exhibit P-18) and dismissed the election petition with costs, holding that the petition was void ab initio for non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Law Points
- Election petition
- mandatory requirements
- Section 81(3) Representation of the People Act
- 1951
- attestation of affidavit
- copy service
- defect not curable
- Order 6 Rule 16 CPC
- Order 7 Rule 11 CPC
- Section 86(1) RP Act
- dismissal for non-compliance
