Pimpri Assembly Election Petition: Rejection at Threshold vs. Trial Warranted.

Headnote:

The Bombay High Court dismissed the application seeking rejection of an election petition under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and Sections 81 & 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petitioner had challenged the election of Anna Dadu Bansode from Pimpri Assembly Constituency alleging suppression of material facts in the election affidavit, irregularities in nomination objections, and violations in EVM-VVPAT handling. The Court held that the petition disclosed sufficient material facts (facta probanda) to warrant a trial and that the question of proving these allegations (facta probantia) was a matter for trial, not for summary dismissal.

Background:

1. The petitioner, Sulakshana Raju Dhar, challenged the election of Anna Dadu Bansode, who had won with 1,09,239 votes, whereas the petitioner secured 72,575 votes.
2. Allegations included suppression of assets and liabilities in Form 26 affidavit, irregularities in objections to the nomination, and discrepancies in EVM-VVPAT procedures.
3. The petitioner submitted supporting annexures detailing the alleged irregularities.
4. The respondent/applicant argued that the petition was vague, lacked cause of action, and verification was defective, seeking rejection at threshold.

Court’s Observations:

1. Election petitions are governed exclusively by the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and procedural defects alone do not justify rejection if material facts are pleaded.
2. Distinction between facta probanda (material facts) and facta probantia (evidence/particulars) was emphasized. Allegations must be pleaded clearly, but proof is a matter for trial.
3. The petitioner had sufficiently pleaded material facts regarding suppression of assets, nomination objections, and EVM irregularities.
4. Dismissing the petition at threshold would preclude consideration of triable issues and was therefore inappropriate.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Sections 81 & 83, Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Filing and verification of election petitions; threshold rejection criteria.
2. Order VII Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Rejection of plaint/pleadings at threshold.
3. Section 100(1)(d)(i) & (iv), Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Grounds for declaring an election void.

Decision:

1. Application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and Sections 81 & 83 RPA 1951 for rejection of the election petition is dismissed.
2. The election petition will proceed to trial on merits regarding suppression of assets, nomination objections, and EVM-VVPAT irregularities.

Citation: 2025:BHC-OS:21629

Case: Sulakshana Raju Dhar v. Anna Dadu Bansode & Ors.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay

Coram: Gauri Godse, J.

Date of Decision: 20 November 2025

Election Petition No.: 18 of 2025

Application (L) No.: 24466 of 2025