Supreme Court Responds to Maneka Gandhi's Challenge Against SP MP Election in Sultanpur

New Delhi, Jan 7 (NationPress) On Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued a notice concerning a petition submitted by former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi, who is challenging the election of Rambhual Nishad from the Samajwadi Party as the MP for Sultanpur Lok Sabha constituency in Uttar Pradesh.

In her petition, Gandhi argued that the SP candidate failed to disclose four ongoing criminal cases against him in his election certificate.

Maneka Gandhi was defeated by Rambhual Nishad by a margin of 43,174 votes in Sultanpur, with Nishad receiving 4,44,330 votes compared to Gandhi's 4,01,156 votes.

In August 2024, the Allahabad High Court rejected her election petition on the grounds that it was submitted late, violating Section 81 coupled with Section 86 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951.

Section 81 stipulates that an election petition must be filed within 45 days from the election date of the declared winner. Justice Rajan Roy of the Lucknow Bench noted that the election took place on June 4, but Gandhi's petition was filed on July 27, 2024.

In the ruling delivered on August 14, Justice Roy remarked: "The election petition has evidently been filed past the 45-day deadline established in Section 81 of the Act of 1951. Section 86 mandates that the High Court must dismiss any election petition that does not comply with Sections 81, 82, or 117 of the Act 1951."

The High Court emphasized that there is no provision in the RP Act that allows for delay condonation, stating, "While the repealed Section 85 permitted delay condonation in filing election petitions, no such provision exists in the current RP Act."

In addition to contesting the dismissal of her election petition, Maneka Gandhi has also questioned the legal standing of the 45-day limitation period through a separate writ petition presented to the Supreme Court.

Regarding this latter matter, a Bench led by Justice Surya Kant indicated that the petition essentially sought the judicial body to enact legislation, suggesting that changing the 45-day limit through judicial interpretation could lead to an influx of litigation.

Considering the Supreme Court's reluctance to entertain the petition regarding the validity of Section 81 of the RP Act, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Maneka Gandhi, decided to withdraw the writ petition.

The Supreme Court provided the opportunity to raise and discuss the arguments from the writ petition within the Special Leave Petition filed against the election petition's dismissal.