Supreme Court stays election petition in Orissa High Court against Deputy CM KV Singh Deo

The Supreme Court recently stayed proceedings before the Orissa High Court in an election petition challenging the 2024 victory of Odisha Deputy Chief Minister Kanak Vardhan Singh Deo from the Patnagarh Assembly constituency [Kanak Vardhan Singh Deo vs. Saroj Kumar Meher].

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice on Singh Deo’s plea and directed that the election petition pending before the High Court shall remain stayed until further orders.

The dispute traces back to the 2024 Odisha Assembly elections. Singh Deo was declared elected from Patnagarh. Soon after, an election petition was filed before the Orissa High Court by his rival candidate, Saroj Kumar Meher. The petition questioned the validity of Singh Deo’s election and alleged improper acceptance of his nomination papers.

Meher claimed that there had been suppression of material information relating to criminal antecedents and assets disclosed in statutory forms filed by Singh Deo at the time of nomination. These allegations were framed as corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Singh Deo, as the returned candidate, did not immediately contest the matter on merits. Instead, he filed an application before the High Court under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking rejection of the election petition at the threshold.

He argued that the election petition did not comply with Section 83(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which lays down strict requirements for election petitions.

According to him, the petition lacked material facts and full particulars of the alleged corrupt practices. More importantly, it was not accompanied by the mandatory affidavit in Form 25 as required under Rule 94-A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.

Under the law, when a petitioner alleges corrupt practices, the election petition must be supported by a sworn affidavit in the prescribed format. Singh Deo contended that this was not a minor procedural lapse but a foundational defect.

He also argued that the petition failed to implead necessary parties, including officials against whom allegations of connivance had been made.

On November 28, 2025, the Orissa High Court dismissed his application. The High Court held that the alleged defects were curable in nature and allowed the election petition to proceed.

This led to the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Before the apex court, Senior Advocate SB Upadhyay, appearing for Singh Deo, argued that the High Court had erred in treating the complete absence of a statutory affidavit as a curable defect. He relied on several Supreme Court judgments which have held that election law is a special statutory regime requiring strict compliance.

Singh Deo's plea stressed that where the statute mandates a specific procedure, it must be followed strictly. According to him, absence of the prescribed affidavit went to the very root of maintainability.

It was further argued that vague allegations about income-tax returns, HUF (Hindu Undivided Family) status, investments, shares, debentures, and pending criminal cases were made without specific details. He claimed that the election petition did not spell out what information was allegedly suppressed, how it was suppressed, and how it materially affected the election result.

He contended that allowing such petitions to proceed would dilute the strict statutory discipline governing election disputes and encourage speculative challenges.

The Court eventually issued notice and passed the interim order staying the High Court proceedings.

The matter will now be heard after notice is served and responses are filed.

Singh Deo was represented by Upadhyay along with advocates Lalitendu Mohpatra, Shrey Kapoor, Nisha Thakur and Abhinav Kathuria.

[Read Order]