The Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Aravind Kumar stated, “Counsel seeks permission to withdraw the present special leave petition for exhausting the remedy available before the Constitutional Court.
![[LS Election 2024] SC Refuses to Entertain Independent Candidate's Plea against Rejection of Nomination](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-35-4.png?resize=820%2C342&ssl=1)
NEW DELHI: Today (May 31st): The Supreme Court refused to hear a special leave petition filed by Abhishek Dangi, an independent candidate from the Jehanabad constituency in Bihar. Dangi sought relief after his nomination was rejected on “hyper-technical grounds” by the District Magistrate-Returning Officer.
READ ALSO: Hotels & Bar Owners Moves Bombay HC Against ‘Dry Day’ | LS Polls Counting Day
Dangi was contesting the dismissal of his writ petition by a single judge of the Patna High Court, which had been rejected on grounds of non-maintainability.
The bench, comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Aravind Kumar, stated,
“Counsel seeks permission to withdraw the present special leave petition for exhausting the remedy available before the Constitutional Court. Dismissed as withdrawn.”
Justice Karol suggested that Dangi should file a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) before the High Court. The bench also recommended that Dangi’s counsel file an election petition with the High Court. Consequently, the counsel withdrew the special leave petition.
The petitioner argued that the polling date for the constituency is June 1, 2024, and that his detailed representation to the Returning Officer on May 16, 2024, had not been considered.
The High Court had noted,
“It is crystal clear that there is no appeal provided by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, against the order of the returning officer accepting or rejecting a nomination paper.
Nomination and scrutiny being part of the election process, the Hon’ble Supreme Court decided in the case of N. P. Ponnuswami vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency & Ors. [1952] S.C.R. that the bar created by Art. 329(b) of the Constitution applies to the orders of the returning officer accepting or rejecting nomination papers. These orders must be challenged through an election petition and not at a pre-poll stage.”
Article 329(b) of the Constitution states that no election to either the House of Parliament or the State Legislatures shall be called into question except by an election petition presented according to the relevant law.
Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, specifies that no election shall be contested except through an election petition presented in accordance with its provisions.
Relying on Article 329(b) and Section 80, the High Court concluded,
“A suit, an appeal, or a writ petition challenging the acceptance or rejection of a nomination paper in an election to the Central or State legislature is not competent. In view of the Supreme Court’s pronouncement, this writ petition is dismissed as non-maintainable.”
Consequently, the special leave petition was dismissed.
Case Title: Abhishek Dangi v. Election Commission of India and Ors. (SLP(C) No. 12563/2024)
