Bombay High Court dismisses plea challenging BJP MLA R Tamil Selvan’s 2024 election win

The Bombay High Court on Monday dismissed an election petition challenging the victory of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislator Captain R Tamil Selvan from the Sion-Koliwada Assembly constituency in the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections [Ganesh Kumar Yadav v Capt. R Tamil Selvan].

Captain Selvan, a three-term Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA), was earlier elected from the same seat in 2014 and 2019.

The order dismissing a petition challenging his 2024 election win was passed by Justice Milind Jadhav.

The Court allowed an application filed by Selvan seeking the dismissal of this election petition, noting that the petition was vague and failed to explain how Selvan’s alleged failure to disclose certain information in his election form had any impact on the outcome of the election.

"It is ... prima facie seen that the Election Petition comprises of vague and generic pleadings and there is complete absence of material facts ... The pleadings in the Petition do not disclose how the alleged omissions had a material bearing on the result of the election," the August 18 ruling said.

The petition was filed by Ganesh Kumar Yadav, the Indian National Congress candidate, who finished second in the 2024 election.

He alleged that Captain R Tamil Selvan’s victory should be declared void under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act).

The election was held on November 20, 2024, with Selvan winning 73,429 votes and Yadav receiving 65,534. The petition was filed on December 30, 2024.

Counsel appearing for Yadav argued that Captain Selvan had failed to disclose key financial liabilities in his Form 26 affidavit and therefore must be disqualified.

This included a housing loan of ₹90 lakhs with an outstanding amount of over ₹86 lakhs, two arbitral awards amounting to over ₹2.75 crore, and liabilities such as being a guarantor for loans totaling nearly ₹70 lakh.

The petitioner contended that these omissions amounted to deliberate suppression of facts and materially affected the election outcome.

On the other hand, counsel representing Selvan, countered that the petition lacked material facts and failed to establish how the alleged non-disclosures had any impact on the election result.

He stated that the housing loan was availed by Selvan’s daughter and serviced entirely by her; the arbitration award was stayed by the court and thus not a crystallized liability; and that all necessary liabilities were duly disclosed in Form 26.

The Court, while dismissing the plea observed that the petitioner failed to include a a concise statement of material facts as required by the law, adding that this was an essential requirement in an election petition.

"Even a singular omission of statutory requirement must entail dismissal of the Election Petition by having recourse to provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC, in my view, the present Election Petition does not disclose any cause of action for making out any of the ground under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) read with Section 83 of RP Act and therefore the Election Petition cannot be taken to trial and is liable to be rejected by having recourse to the provisions of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC," the Court concluded.

On the issue of non-disclosure, the Court said that while these disclosures are mandatory, the same cannot be a ground for setting aside the election.

“While disclosure in Form No.26 is mandatory, non-disclosure or partial disclosure constitutes an irregularity attracting Section 125A of the Act, and it cannot be a ground for setting aside the election under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) ... the alleged omissions do not amount to noncompliance with provisions of Section 33 or Rule 4A so as to constitute a defect of substantial character under Section 36(4) of the RP Act," the judgment read.

Advocate Premlal Krishnan along with advocates Nadeem Sharma, Hrishikesh Nadkarni, Kailash Tiwari, Salman Atharia and Abuzar Khan, Advocates, instructed by Pan India Legal Services LLP, appeared for Yadav.

Senior Advocate Veerendra Tulzapurkar along with advocates Mandar Soman and Shailesh Shukla instructed by advocate Shailesh H Shukla, briefed by Shailesh H Shukla & H Vaidyanathan Associates, appeared for Captain Selvan.

[Read Order]