The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging Manish Sisodia’s 2020 Patparganj election victory, citing lack of material facts and no valid legal cause. The Court held election challenges cannot be based on vague claims or used for roving inquiries.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Saturday dismissed an election petition that had challenged the 2020 Delhi Assembly election victory of Aam Aadmi Party leader Manish Sisodia from the Patparganj constituency. The Court held that the petition did not contain proper facts and failed to show any legally valid reason to interfere with the election result.
The judgment was delivered on January 17 by Justice Jasmeet Singh, who allowed the application filed by the respondent seeking rejection of the petition at the initial stage under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
ALSO READ: Rs 2,000 Crore Scam: ACB Summons AAP’s Manish Sisodia & Satyendar Jain in Corruption Case
The Court clearly stated that interference with an electoral mandate is allowed only in rare and exceptional situations and strictly in line with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The election petition was filed by Pratap Chandra, a defeated candidate who had secured only 95 votes in the 2020 Delhi Assembly elections.
He alleged that there were large-scale violations of Section 126 of the Representation of the People Act during the “silence period” before polling and also claimed that Sisodia had suppressed information about a criminal case in his nomination affidavit.
While examining these allegations, the Court found that the petition did not meet the basic legal requirements. It held that the pleadings contained only “general and vague averments” and did not disclose the essential material facts as required under Section 83 of the Act.
The Court emphasised that when an election is challenged under Section 100(1)(d), the petitioner must clearly plead and prove how the alleged illegality “materially affected” the election result. The Court noted that no such pleading or explanation was present in the petition.
ALSO READ: Probe Against Manish Sisodia & Satyendar Jain | President Droupadi Murmu Grants Sanction
On the issue of illegal campaigning during the silence period, the Court examined the photographs relied upon by the petitioner and observed that they only showed general party hoardings displaying the party name and symbol.
The Court pointed out that these hoardings did not mention or refer to Manish Sisodia in any manner. It further noted that there was no allegation that these hoardings were authorised by Sisodia, put up with his consent, or even within his knowledge.
Importantly, the petition also failed to plead that the hoardings were displayed within the prohibited 48-hour period or within the relevant polling area. The Court clarified that static party hoardings, by themselves, cannot amount to “propagation” under Section 126 of the Act.
The Court also rejected the allegation that Sisodia had concealed an FIR in his Form 26 affidavit. It explained that under Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, a candidate is required to disclose criminal cases only when charges have been framed or when a competent court has taken cognisance of the offence.
Mere registration of an FIR does not require mandatory disclosure. The Court further observed that the petitioner had not even pleaded that Sisodia had knowledge of the FIR at the time of filing his nomination. This failure, the Court said, was fatal to the allegation of deliberate concealment.
Emphasising the serious nature of election disputes, the Court made it clear that an election petition is not meant to be used as a platform for “fishing or roving inquiries”. It underlined that such proceedings must strictly comply with statutory requirements and must clearly disclose a cause of action.
Since the petition failed to meet these mandatory legal standards and did not disclose any valid ground under the Representation of the People Act, the Delhi High Court dismissed the election petition in its entirety.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Manish Sisodia
