The Supreme Court on Monday, 24 August restored an election petition filed by defeated Congress candidate Hafiz Rashid Ahmed Choudhury, setting aside a Gauhati High Court order that had dismissed the petition at the threshold. The petition challenges the 2024 Lok Sabha victory of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Kripanath Mallah from Assam's Karimganj Parliamentary Constituency.

Background: What the Case Is About

Mallah defeated Choudhury by 18,360 votes in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Choudhury's election petition alleged serious corrupt practices, including rigging, booth capturing, voter intimidation through undue influence, and bribery. The petition specifically alleged booth capturing across 47 polling stations.

The Gauhati High Court had dismissed the petition at the threshold under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, citing objections over the attestation of petition copies, a defect in the Form-25 affidavit, and an allegation that four pages were missing from the petition.

Key Legal Findings of the Supreme Court

A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran addressed each objection in turn. On the attestation issue under Section 81(3) of the Representation of the People Act, the court held that no particular form of attestation is prescribed. The signature of the election petitioner at the foot of every page, affirming the copy as true, is sufficient.

The Bench also ruled that the phrases 'attested to be true copy' and 'certified to be true copy', appearing on different pages of the petition, carry the same legal meaning. Concurring with the earlier judgment in F.A. Sapa v Singora, the court reversed the High Court's contrary finding on this point.

The Form-25 Affidavit Question

On the Form-25 affidavit — which accompanies allegations of corrupt practices and must be signed by the petitioner and attested by a Magistrate of the First Class, a Notary, or a Commissioner of Oaths — the Supreme Court drew a critical distinction. Referring to earlier Constitution Bench precedents, the court held that a defect in Form-25 does not automatically warrant dismissal of the entire election petition under Section 86.

'Obviously, the defect under Section 83 does not entail peremptory dismissal under Section 86 of the RoP Act,' the Bench observed.

The court noted that in the original petition filed before the court, Form-25 had been affirmed before a Commissioner of Affidavits. It directed the Gauhati High Court to verify whether due attestation exists in the original. If attestation is found, the High Court must proceed on merits; if not, it must exclude the corrupt practices allegations but continue examining other grounds.

Missing Pages Allegation Rejected

The Supreme Court upheld the Gauhati High Court's finding that the allegation of four missing pages was an afterthought, stating there was 'absolutely no reason to interfere' with that finding.

What Happens Next

The election petition has been restored to the Gauhati High Court's file for fresh consideration in line with the Supreme Court's directions. The court clarified it had not adjudicated on the truth or otherwise of the substantive allegations. The High Court must now examine the petition on merits — a process that could have direct implications for Mallah's continued membership of the Lok Sabha.