In Brief
In a contest between two legislative assembly candidates from the Indian National Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party, the respondent candidate (INC) filed a nomination paper. Thereafter, his candidature was withdrawn and accepted by the Returning Officer, allegedly by an unauthorized third party (Sri Sanjeev Tana), resulting in the appellant's (BJP) unopposed election. The respondent challenged this before the High Court, arguing violation of Section 37 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which mandates that withdrawal must be made by the candidate personally or by his proposer or election agent duly authorized in writing. The High Court found total non-compliance with Section 37 and declared the election void. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that in a two-candidate election, illegal acceptance of withdrawal materially affects the result by rendering it unopposed. Distinguishing the stringent proof requirements typically applied to improper acceptance of nominations, the Court held that statutory violations in two-candidate contests (where withdrawal automatically ends the contest) engage principles akin to improper rejection of nominations, and the electoral sanctity cannot be sacrificed even if material effect proof might ordinarily be required.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.