In Brief
The Supreme Court examined whether the mandatory security deposit required with an election petition under Madhya Pradesh panchayat law must be made in cash directly to the Specified Officer, or whether a treasury deposit in the officer's name suffices. The appellant deposited Rs. 1000 in a bank treasury in the name of the prescribed authority, producing a challan receipt, but the High Court rejected this as non-compliant. The Court held that the rule requires 'deposit of security'—not 'payment' in cash—and that the mode is irrelevant so long as the security is deposited in the officer's name. Treasury deposits are standard and permissible. The appeal was allowed and the election petition restored for expeditious disposal.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.