Bombay HC upholds election nomination rules, rejects plea for ballot reinstatement
In their dismissal of the petition, the justices emphasised the importance of strict adherence to election procedures for maintaining electoral integrity
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the rejection of a nomination for the upcoming Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections, reaffirming the judiciary's limited scope for intervention in ongoing electoral processes.
The petitioner, Aashish Kishor Gadkari, had sought the court's intervention after his nomination for the Chembur Constituency was rejected on procedural grounds. The returning officer had cited significant omissions in Gadkari's nomination form, including the absence of the proposer's signature and the required oath, though the proposer's name had been mentioned.
Gadkari's counsel appealed to the court under Article 226 of the Constitution, which empowers High Courts to issue writs, requesting reconsideration of his nomination. They argued that the election date's distance allowed time for corrections without causing harm to the process.
The Election Commission's legal representatives countered by citing Article 329 of the Constitution, which restricts judicial intervention in ongoing electoral processes. They maintained that election disputes should be addressed through election petitions after the polls, warning that accommodating Gadkari's request could disrupt the election timeline and affect other candidates with finalised nominations.
The division bench, led by Justices Arif S Doctor and Somasekhar Sundaresan, upheld the constitutional principle limiting judicial intervention during elections. While acknowledging that courts may intervene before or after elections, they emphasised that such intervention during the electoral process is restricted to exceptional cases that aid rather than disrupt the process.
The court determined that Gadkari's errors were fundamental, rendering his nomination incomplete and beyond rectification at this stage. In their dismissal of the petition, the justices emphasised the importance of strict adherence to election procedures for maintaining electoral integrity and timelines, noting that Gadkari could pursue legal remedies after the election.