[2019 General Elections] Bombay High Court dismisses plea by Nitin Gadkari seeking quashing of election petition against him; trial to proceed

The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court on Monday rejected a plea filed by Union Minister Nitin Gadkari seeking quashing of the election petition filed by one Mohammed Nafis Khan challenging Gadkari's election to Lok Sabha in 2019 from Nagpur constituency (Mohammad Nafis Khan v. Election Commission of India)..Khan, a voter from the constituency, had approached the High Court contending that Gadkari had disclosed false information in his nomination affidavit for the 2019 polls. .Gadkari had sought quashing of the petition claiming that the plea by Khan did not disclose any cause of action..A Bench of Justice AS Chandurkar, however, said that the petition did disclose a cause of action and, therefore, ordered that the trial against Gadkari can proceed..However, another application by Gadkari, which sought striking down certain averments in Khan's plea on the ground that they were "vexatious, scandalous, frivolous and delay the trial of the election petition" was partly allowed by the Court..The Court after perusing the nomination affidavit filed by Gadkari and considering the submissions made by Khan in the election petition noted that the source of income disclosed by Gadkari needed consideration. Gadkari in his election affidavit had disclosed that he individually did not own any agricultural land. He had, however, cited agriculture as his source of income. ....in the affidavit filed by the returned candidate and especially paragraph 7(B)(i), it is stated that the returned candidate individually does not own any agriculture land. Further in paragraph 9(a) while giving the details of profession or occupation, the returned candidate has stated the same to be agriculture and in paragraph 9(A) the details of the source of income is shown as agriculture, etc. There is specific assertion in the aforesaid paragraph that according to the returned candidate he does not own land while his business/occupation is shown as agriculture, the source of income being shown as agriculture is false. Taking the aforesaid statements at their face value, it is found that there are averments indicating that the disclosure made in the affidavit filed along with nomination form with regard to source of income to be agriculture is false. These averments disclose existence of material facts and hence they cannot be struck off as being unnecessary or vexatious," the Court said..Khan's petition contained averments regarding details of the Hindu Undivided Family of Gadkari as also the income of his spouse. The Court proceeded to strike down those pleadings on the ground that the averments did not substantiate Khan's claim that Gadkari disclosed false information in his affidavit..Khan had also made several submissions alleging that there was non-compliance with the Election Manual of 2019 by Gadkari. Those pleadings were also struck down on the ground that there were no averments to show how such violations affected Gadkari's election..Khan had also contended that Gadkari incurred election expenses which exceeded the permissible limit of Rs. 70 lakh besides not maintaining an account of the expenses correctly. This was also struck down by the Court on the grounds that there were no material facts to support that claim. .After striking down the averments which were not triable issues and unnecessary, the Court held that the trial could proceed on the basis of the averments which remained in the plea..[Read Judgment]