HIGH COURT REJECTS UNION MINISTER NITIN GADKARI’S PLEA AGAINST ELECTION PETITION BOMBAY FILED AGAINST HIS ELECTION TO LOK SABHA

The BOMBAY HIGH COURT , NAGPUR BENCH dismissed an application filed by UNION MINISTER NITIN GADKARI, challenging an election petition filed against him by one , MOHD. NAFIS KHAN for submittimg false information form and election affidvit .

A single judge bench of JUSTICE A.S. CHANDURKAR allowed the election petition to continue after observing that two points in its prayer with regards to the land solely owned by MR. GADKARI and declaration of agriculture as his source of income “disclosed material facts and necessary cause of action” to challenge to the lok sabha from consituency No. 10-Nagpur . However , the bench went ahead to strike down other prayers as set out in the petition.

there is a specific assertion in the aforesaid paragraph that according to the returned candidate he does not own land while his business/occupation is shown as agriculture is false . taking the afforesaid statements at their face value , it is found that there are averments indicating that the disclosure made in the affidavit filed along with nomination from with regard to source of income to be agriculture is false . these averments disclose existence of material facts and hence cannot be struck off as being unnecessary or vexatious.” The court observed.

NAFIS KHAN , GADKARI’S election was challenged under sec. 100(1)(b),100(1)(d)(1)(2)(4) of the representation of the people act , 1951. The said representation of the people act,1951. The said provision states the grounds for declaring an election as void.

as result of this adjudication the prayer made in civil application No. 12/2021 seeking rejection of the election petition cannot be granted . the election petition consequently would proceed for trial on the basis of the averments that remain after the paragraphs as directed to be struck off are so struck off.” The court held.

Senior ADVOCATE SUNIL v. MANOHAR and ADVOCATE  D.V. CHAUHAN  appeared on behalf of MR. NITIN GADKARI whereas ADVOCATE  S.V.PUROHIT appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close