In Brief
A candidate in Arunachal Pradesh filed nomination papers for assembly election without disclosing properties of her deceased spouse in Form 26, marking them 'not applicable'. The opponent challenged her nomination, arguing non-disclosure was a substantial defect. The High Court upheld this challenge, invalidating her election. The Supreme Court allowed her appeal, holding that since customary law (Mishmi tribe) granted all property to the first wife—not the appellant—she had no legal interest or claim to disclose. Indicating 'not applicable' was not material non-disclosure. The Court emphasized that defects are 'substantial' only if they materially affect election results and must be evaluated based on actual circumstances, not abstract principles.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.