Congress MLA Chanda Singh Gaur Moves Supreme Court Against HC's Refusal To Dismiss Election Petition Filed By BJP MP Rahul Singh Lodhi

Congress MLA Chanda Singh Gaur has approached the Supreme Court challenging Madhya Pradesh High Court's rejection of her plea under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to dismiss an election petition filed by BJP MP Rahul Singh Lodhi.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, before whom the case was listed today, has posted it to January, 2025. The order was passed after briefly hearing Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat (for Chanda Singh Gaur) and Senior Advocate Atmaram Nadkarni (for Rahul Singh Lodhi), noting that the court is only required to see as to what is the prescribed format for an affidavit under Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act and what kind of affidavit was filed in the instant case.

During the course of arguments, Nadkarni referred to the Court's earlier decision in Thangjam Arunkumar v. Yumkham Erabot Singh [2023 LiveLaw (SC) 705], where it was held that the requirement to file an affidavit under the proviso to Section 83(1)(c) is not mandatory and substantial compliance is sufficient.

Hearing him, Justice Kant summarized the "tentative understanding" of the bench as follows: "In a case where there are no allegation of corrupt practice, the filing of a defective affidavit is a curable defect. But in a case where corrupt practice is alleged, probably, filing of an affidavit in prescribed form is still a mandatory condition".

Referring to Nadkarni's reliance on Thangjam Arunkumar, Kamat on the other hand conveyed to the Court that Gaur's case is on a different footing, because according to her, even on a bare reading of the election petition, no case of 'corrupt practice' is made out.

For context, as per the proviso to Section 83(1) RP Act, where there is an allegation of 'corrupt practice', the election petition shall be accompanied by an affidavit in the prescribed form in support of the allegation of corrupt practice and the particulars thereof.

To give a brief background of the case, after the 2023 Legislative Assembly elections concluded in Madhya Pradesh on December 3, 2023, Rahul Singh Lodhi filed an election petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the election of Chanda Singh Gaur from Constituency No.47, Kharagpur, District Tikamgarh on the ground that she had given false information/affidavit.

In response, Chanda Singh Gaur filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking dismissal of the election petition. In support of the dismissal, it was urged that though Rahul Singh Lodhi filed an affidavit alleging corrupt practice alongwith the election petition, the same was not in the prescribed format (Ref: Form No. 25 and Rule 94A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961).

The prayer of dismissal was opposed by Rahul Singh Lodhi on the ground that even if the affidavit was not in prescribed format, it was a curable defect and the election petition was not liable to be dismissed on that ground.

After perusing the affidavit filed alongwith the election petition, the High Court observed that it was in terms of Form 25 as well as Section 83 of the RP Act and there was no case of non-fulfilment of Rule 94A of the 1961 Rules. Relying on the following excerpt from the affidavit, the Court concluded that it specified the allegation of 'corrupt practice':

“that the statements made in paragraphs 8 to 27 of the accompanying election petition about the commission of corrupt practice as defined in Section 123(1)(A)(a), (3), (3A) and (4) of the Act, 1951 and the particulars of such corrupt practice given in paragraphs 8 to 27 of the said petition and Annexures P/2 to P/6 thereto are true to my information."

In this backdrop, the O7R11 plea was dismissed and Chanda Singh Gaur approached the Supreme Court.

Case Title: CHANDA SINGH GAUR v. RAHUL SINGH LODHI, SLP(C) No. 29490/2024