- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Karnataka High Court
- /
- Elections | Even Details Of...
Elections | Even Details Of Acquittal In Criminal Case Should Be Disclosed By Candidate In Nomination Form: Karnataka High Court
Mustafa Plumber
16 Jan 2024 5:15 PM IST
The Karnataka High Court has held that when an election nomination form is filed by any candidate, he/she has to disclose all criminal proceedings filed against them, irrespective of whether the candidate had been acquitted or not, whether the proceedings have been quashed or not.A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed a petition filed by one Mudiyappa who had challenged...
The Karnataka High Court has held that when an election nomination form is filed by any candidate, he/she has to disclose all criminal proceedings filed against them, irrespective of whether the candidate had been acquitted or not, whether the proceedings have been quashed or not.
A single judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed a petition filed by one Mudiyappa who had challenged the trial court order setting aside his election to the Bevoor Gram Panchayath for failure to disclose an acquittal.
The petitioner contended that the only allegation against him was that he had not disclosed an acquittal in a criminal proceeding. He argued that it is only if there is a conviction and or the said criminal proceedings are pending that disclosure is required. It was further contended that it is only if results of the election are materially affected that an election could be declared as void but, the non disclosure of acquittal could not have any such material impact.
The bench noted that the Apex Court in the case of Democratic Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms and another with Peoples Union for Civil Liberties and another v. Union of India and another, has held that all details of the candidate including those relating to criminal proceedings would have to be disclosed in the nomination papers.
“Hon'ble Apex Court has directed is disclosure of all criminal proceedings filed against the candidate which in my considered opinion also includes criminal proceedings where the candidate has been acquitted since what is important is that disclosure of information by a candidate is to be made and for the electorate to be aware of all relevant information as relating to the candidate contesting in the election,” High Court said.
It held the aspect of conviction or sentence may be relevant for disqualification of candidate. In so far as filing of nomination forms, what is required is full disclosure of all aspects relating the candidate, it said. "Thus, the distinction now sought to be drawn between conviction and acquittal or pendency and acquittal is a distinction without any difference when the aspect of disclosure being required to be made is considered,” said the Court.
It added that mere fact of filing of complaint and criminal proceedings would suffice for such candidate to disclose the same in his nomination form. "If there is no particular row or column in the said application to enable disclosure or if the space available is less than what is required, such candidate could always make use of additional sheets to disclose of particulars like crime number, provisions under which allegations have been made, who are all other co-accused, who is de-facto complainant, the stage of the case if pending, nature of disposal, date of disposal, if an appeal is filed and the details as regards appeal, if proceedings have been quashed, set aside etc.”
The court also rejected the argument of the petitioner that non-disclosure of his acquittal would not have any material bearing on the election inasmuch he was acquitted. It said,
“The concept of election being materially affected, cannot be construed in a narrow sense but should be construed in a broader sense inasmuch as all details relating to particular candidate should be made available to the Electorate to make its own decision on the material available. Non-disclosure could also be said to be suppression. Whether it is material or not is for the electorate to decide. What the petitioner was required to do was to disclose all material facts including the fact of the petitioner having been acquitted in criminal proceedings filed.”
Accordingly, it dismissed the petition.
Appearance: Advocate Shivraj S Balloli for Petitioner.
AGA Praveen Uppar For R2 & R10.
Advocate Vidyashankar G Dalwai for Caveator R1.
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 26
Case Title: Mudiyappa AND Basavaraj @ Basappa & Others
Case No: Writ Petition No 107291 OF 2023