Narayan Rane facebook
News

Bombay High Court rejects election petition against BJP MP Narayan Rane

The Court held that electronic evidence cannot substitute material pleadings in election petitions, especially when petitioners fail to provide transcriptions.

Neha Joshi

The Kolhapur bench of the Bombay High Court rejected an election petition filed by Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Vinayak Raut challenging the 2024 Lok Sabha election win of BJP MP Narayan Rane from the Ratnagiri-Sindhudurg constituency. [Vinayak Raut v. Election Commission of India & Ors]

Justice Shailesh P Brahme allowed an interim application filed by Rane under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) seeking rejection of the election petition at the threshold. 

Justice Shailesh Brahme

The Court held that Raut failed to disclose a valid cause of action due to non-compliance with Section 83(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Rane had secured 4,48,514 votes against Raut’s 4,00,656 votes in the election. In his petition, Raut alleged corrupt practices by BJP workers, including voter bribing and campaigning beyond the Model Code of Conduct deadline.

However, Justice Brahme observed that the allegations contained in the petition lacked fundamental material details. 

“The corrupt practice as alleged is very vague and lacks material particulars namely; time, place and identity of the persons who were campaigning. The news reports are also not sufficient to precisely corroborate the claim of Raut,” the Court held.

The Court held that electronic evidence like pen drives cannot substitute material pleadings in election petitions, especially when petitioners fail to provide transcriptions.

It concluded that omission of even a single material fact would lead to an incomplete cause of action. This would entitle the returning candidate to seek dismissal of the election petition.

Senior Advocate Satish Maneshinde, along with Advocates Saket Mone, Srushti Thorat and Yuvraj Dhole, briefed by Vidhii Partners, appeared for Rane. 

Advocates Asim Sarode, Shriya Aawale, Saken Mujawar, Tushar Sonule and Prabuddha Borgaonkar represented Raut.

[Read order]

Vinayak Raut v. Election Commission of India & Ors.pdf
Preview

CM Vijay, ministers must provide proof to prove claim of coverup in Veeramani POCSO case: DMK to Madras High Court

Madras High Court upholds State move to rename streets, colonies carrying caste names

Delhi High Court seeks Centre, IRCTC stand on PIL alleging misuse of online railway ticket platforms

Kerala court initiates contempt proceedings against MLA Najeeb Kanthapuram for obstructing Advocate Commissioner

Kerala court sentences woman to life in prison for murdering her newborn son

SCROLL FOR NEXT