Today, On 20th September, The Supreme Court adjourned the hearing of Maneka Gandhi’s petition challenging the election of the Samajwadi Party (SP) candidate from Sultanpur until September 30. The plea contests the validity of the SP candidate’s win in the 2019 general elections from the constituency. Gandhi, a prominent political figure, raised concerns about irregularities in the election process.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday postponed the hearing of former Union minister Maneka Gandhi’s plea challenging the election of Samajwadi Party candidate Ram Bhual Nishad from the Sultanpur Lok Sabha seat until September 30.
Gandhi had lost to Nishad by a margin of 43,174 votes in the 2024 general elections.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan granted senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Gandhi, additional time to submit a detailed analysis regarding the limitation period under other special statutes.
Gandhi also filed a separate petition questioning the 45-day limit imposed for filing election petitions.
The bench noted,
“Ultimately, it is a matter of policy, and the court has to consider the legislative intent behind setting the 45-day limit from the date of the returned candidate’s election. This may have been done to avoid uncertainty regarding the election results.”
The court further observed that in several judgments, it has been held that the Limitation Act does not apply to special statutes like the Representation of the People Act.
Luthra requested additional time to present cases where the fixed limitation could be relaxed even in special statute situations.
The Supreme Court advised senior lawyer Siddharth Luthra to thoroughly examine how the limitation period for filing election petitions was established and the judicial precedents on the matter.
The bench remarked,
“You should also consider how the legislature has approached the issue of limitation and its evolution over time. Ultimately, we need to understand the legislative intent, as this is a policy issue.”
Maneka Gandhi’s appeal challenges the August 14 decision of the Allahabad High Court, which dismissed her election petition against Samajwadi Party’s Ram Bhual Nishad for being time-barred. The Lucknow bench of the high court had ruled that her petition was filed beyond the statutory 45-day period, as prescribed under the Representation of the People Act, and could not be heard on its merits.
Gandhi argued that Nishad misled voters by not fully disclosing his criminal history, stating that 12 criminal cases were pending against him, but he declared only eight in his affidavit. She sought to have the delay in filing her petition excused on this basis.
However, the high court rejected her plea, stating,
“This election petition, being time-barred by Section 81 read with Section 86 of the Representation of People Act 1951 and Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, is liable to be dismissed.”