RAJENDRA KUMAR MESHRAM versus VANSHMANI PRASAD VERMA AND ANR.
The High Court erred in declaring the appellant's election void without determining whether the improper acceptance of nomination had materially affected the result, as required by Section 100(1)(d) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. Additionally, there was no pleading or evidence that the appellant was not qualified to contest as a voter of the State, which would be necessary to invoke Section 100(1)(a). The order of the High Court was therefore unsustainable.
Source excerpt
- Improper acceptance of nomination
- Void election
- Material effect on result
- Electoral roll requirement