Bombay High Court Rejects Union Minister Nitin Gadkari's Plea Against Election Petition Filed Against His Election To Lok Sabha

The Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench dismissed an application filed by Union Minister Nitin Gadkar challenging an election petition filed against him by one, Mohd. Nafis Khan for submitting false information in nomination form and election affidavit.

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 his election in the general elections to the Lok Sabha from Constituency No.10-Nagpur. However, the bench went ahead to strike down other prayers as set out in the petition.

"There is 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, the source of income being shown as agriculture is false. Taking the aforesaid statements at their face value, it is found that there are averments indicating that the disclosure made in the affidavit filed along with nomination form with regard to source of income to be agriculture is false. These averments disclose existence of material facts and hence they cannot be struck off as being unnecessary or vexatious." The Court observed.

Nafis Khan, a resident of Nagpur Constituency contended in his election petition that Nitin Gadkari in his election affidavit disclosed that he did not own any land in his personal capacity. Moreover, his source of income was shown to be through agriculture. This according to the petitioner was false information furnished by the Union Minister in the General Elections.

Therefore, Gadkari's election was challenged under sec. 100(1)(b), 100 (1) (d) (i), (ii) and (iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The said provision states the grounds for declaring an election as void.

"As a 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.

Click Here To Download Order

[Download Order]