Kerala HC seeks response from Payyannur MLA in election petition alleging malpractice ↗
Consider the following statements regarding election petitions under the Representation of the People Act, 1951:
- An election petition challenging a returned candidate's election on grounds of corrupt practice is filed directly in the Supreme Court of India.
- Spreading false statements about a rival candidate's personal character or conduct is recognised as a corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and constitutes valid grounds for an election petition.
- An election petition may be presented not only by a candidate at the election but also by any elector of the constituency concerned.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Explanation
Statement 1 is incorrect. Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, election petitions challenging the election of a Member of a State Legislative Assembly are filed before the High Court of the concerned state, not the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only gets involved if the matter is appealed from the High Court's decision. Statement 2 is correct. The RPA, 1951 lists as corrupt practices the making or publishing of false statements about the personal character or conduct of a candidate, which can form the basis of an election petition challenging a returned candidate's election. Statement 3 is correct. High Courts are empowered to manage their dockets for election petitions and can constitute special benches to hear petitions arising from a general election, which is consistent with the institutional framework under the RPA, 1951 for expeditious disposal of election disputes.