Gujarat HC rejects petition challenging election of BJP MP from Bhavnagar seat

The Print

06-05-2025

Article 84(a) of the Constitution outlines the qualification requirement for being a Member of Parliament Justice MK Thakker, in an order passed on April 30, noted the court was of the view that the petitioner has failed to establish that such 'improper acceptance' of the nomination form materially affected the election of the candidate.
Independent candidate Bhagvatiben Brahmkshatriya, among the losing nominees from the Bhavnagar Lok Sabha seat in the 2024 polls, had moved a petition in the HC with a prayer to declare election of Bambhaniya as void on the ground she had not filed her affidavit along with the nomination form in English and rather did so in Gujarati, thereby violating Article 84(a) of the Constitution.
Ahmedabad, May 6 (PTI) The Gujarat High Court has rejected a plea challenging the election of Lok Sabha MP and Union minister Nimuben Bambhaniya from Bhavnagar, observing the petitioner has failed to establish 'improper acceptance' of her nomination form materially affected her election.
Bambhaniya, a first-time MP from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is currently serving as the Minister of State for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution in the Modi government.
Mere non-compliance or breach of the Constitution or statutory provisions, as alleged by the petitioner, by itself does not result in invalidating the result of the candidate under section 100(1)(d)(IV) (of Representation of People Act, 1951, dealing with grounds of election to be declared as void), the court observed.
For the election of (winning) candidate to be declared void under clause 4 of section 100(1)(d)(IV) of the Act, there has to be a proof of the fact 'that such a breach or non-observance has resulted in materially affecting' the final outcome, the HC maintained.
'In other words, the violation of breach or non-observance or non-compliance with the provisions of Constitution or the Act, 1951 or the rules or the (apex court) orders made thereunder, by itself does not render the election of written candidates void under section 100(1)(d)(IV),' it said.
'The language of section 100(1)(c) clearly places the burden upon the objector to substantiate the objection that the result of the election has been materially affected,' the court contended.
Since the petitioner has failed to establish that improper acceptance of the nomination form was fatal to the elections, the court found no merits in her submission and dismissed the plea. PTI KA PD RSY
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.