The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea seeking a preliminary ruling on limitation in the election petition against former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, with the Bench saying “let the trial proceed” and stressing time-bound disposal of election cases.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking that the objection of limitation be decided as a preliminary issue in the election petition filed by Vijay Baghel against former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel, orally observing that the objection involved mixed questions of fact and law and that the trial should go on [Bhupesh Baghel v. Vijay Baghel].
A Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana heard the matter. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for the petitioner.
The hearing
Sibal submitted that the petitioner had two prayers: that the preliminary issue be decided, or that the trial court not say there was no such issue. Justice V. Mohana responded orally that limitation involved mixed questions of fact and law, that the objection could have been pleaded earlier, and said:
“Let the trial proceed. You are delaying as much as possible. You will have a decision.”
CJI Surya Kant remarked, “Somebody should have advised you to amend the written statement.” Justice Joymalya Bagchi added:
“This is another aspect of delaying the trial. Once we allow this, then you will pray for amendment. Election cases should have time-bound disposal.”
The outcome
Sibal asked the Court to record his statement that no further application would be filed. Justice Bagchi said the Bench had refrained from imposing costs on the persuasion of senior counsel, and the CJI dismissed the plea.
The Court has expressed no view on the merits of the election petition, which will now proceed to trial. Both sides’ claims remain to be decided on evidence.
Why the hearing matters
Section 86(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 requires an election petition to be tried as expeditiously as possible and ideally concluded within six months. Courts have repeatedly held that issues turning on facts, such as limitation where dates are disputed, are better decided at trial than as preliminary issues. The Bench’s remarks reinforce that election disputes should not be stalled by piecemeal objections.
Case Title: Bhupesh Baghel v. Vijay Baghel (title and case number to be verified)
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, Supreme Court of India
Date of Order: November 3, 2026
Appearance: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal for the petitioner