In Brief
In this election law case, the Supreme Court examined whether an election petition challenging the validity of an election on grounds of corrupt practice was properly accompanied by the required affidavit in prescribed form. The returned candidate objected to the petition claiming it lacked the mandatory affidavit in Form 25. The Court held that the election petitioner had validly filed two affidavits with the petition, and the returned candidate was estopped from later disputing this fact since he had not challenged it in his initial objection. The Court rejected the returned candidate's attempt to shift positions between different stages of proceedings and upheld the High Court's finding that the affidavit complied with statutory requirements. The Court also clarified that single judges of the High Court have statutory authority to adjudicate election petitions and clarifications thereof.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.