Latest news with #Form-26
Indian Express
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
HC upholds BJP MLA's victory, says ‘honest' disclosure of second marriage won't flout rules
Dismissing a plea against election of BJP MLA Rajendra Gavit for Palghar (ST) constituency in 2024 Assembly polls, the Bombay High Court on Monday, observed that his 'honest and candid' disclosure about his second marriage, which is permissible in his community, would not flout election rules. The HC passed an order on a petition filed by one Sudhir Brijendra Jain, a social activist from Palghar seeking a declaration that Gavit's election was void based on his declaration in Form number- 26 filed along with his nomination naming one Rupali Gavit as his 'spouse No. 2' was false. Jain had claimed that Gavit's marriage was void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which prohibits bigamy. Gavit, a member of the Tribal Bhil community, had contended that the custom of polygamy exists in the said community and second marriage is permissible. A single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne noted that 'there may be cases where a candidate belonging to a particular religion, in which polygamy is not prohibited, has contracted multiple marriages.' Jain had claimed that Gavit's declaration amounted to 'corrupt practice' and his election was set aside under provision of Representation of People Act, 1951. He alleged that the declaration was made to exert undue influence on Scheduled Tribes (ST) voters in the constituency since Rupali belonged to the local tribal community. Justice Marne noted that the petitioner failed to establish that any statement made by Gavit in his affidavit in Form 26 and disclosure of second marriage by adding a column in Form-26 is false. The HC added that there were 'no pleadings (in the plea) to establish undue influence on voters with their free exercise of electoral right on account of respondent Rajendra Gavit disclosing his second marriage with Smt. Rupali Gavit.' The Court observed, 'On the contrary, Respondent (Rajendra Gavit) has candidly and honestly disclosed information relating to his second marriage with Smt. Rupali Gavit. In my view, therefore Petitioner has failed to disclose real cause of action for challenging the election of the Respondent,' the HC noted. 'In my view, therefore, mere addition of a column in Form 26 Affidavit would not attract a ground for challenging the election. Thus, no ground under Section 100(1)(d)(i) or (iv) of 1951 Act is made out in the pleadings raised in the election petition, warranting its dismissal,' Justice Marne held.
India Today
20 hours ago
- Politics
- India Today
Shiv Sena candidate's election upheld, court rejects plea against 2nd spouse mention
The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the election of Shiv Sena MLA Rajendra Dhedya Gavit, who won the election from Palghar Assembly constituency in Maharashtra due to his second petition was filed by one Sudhir Jain, who is a voter from 130-Palghar Assembly Constituency, which is reserved for the Scheduled Tribe. Jain claimed that he is a social activist from Palghar, who raised an objection to Gavit's declarations in the Affidavit in Form-26 filed along with the nomination was the tribal development minister in the Congress-NCP alliance government. In 2018, he joined the BJP before the Palghar Lok Sabha seat bypoll, and won the same. In 2019, he joined the BJP's alliance partner, Shiv Sena, to contest from Palghar. Jain alleged that Gavit named Rupali Gavit as his second wife, which is not only incorrect but also against the format of Form-26, as second marriages are void under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Senior Advocate Neeta Karnik, appearing for Jain, argued that there is no provision for making any declaration of a second spouse and thus, the addition of an extra column by Gavit to add the name of his second spouse, is in violation of Rule 4A of the election was first married to Usha Gavit, and then he married Rupali Gavit. Both his spouses have filed income tax Nitin Gangal, appearing for Gavit, said that the mere addition of a column to Form-26, for the purpose of making true and correct disclosure, cannot be a ground for seeking declaration of election as void. Gangal added that "there is no prohibition or restriction on the candidate from making any voluntary disclosure of information". "That declaration of information relating to the marriage of Gavit with Rupali Gavit depicts his honesty," the lawyer further said that Section 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 makes the provisions of the Act inapplicable to tribal persons and Gavit is admittedly one belonging to the Bhil community. Therefore, the lawyer said there is no prohibition on the performance of a second marriage. "That otherwise there is a custom of polygamy in the Bhil Community," he going through the arguments of both sides, the bench of Justice Sandeep Marne, said that "merely because Gavit made true disclosure of details of the PAN and the status of Income Tax Returns of his second spouse, it cannot be contended that there is any violation of Rule 4A of the election rules on his part".Rule 4A of the election rules relates to the form of affidavit to be filed at the time of delivering the nomination paper, the bench bench said that the act of Gavit of adding a column to the Form-26 Affidavit to make true and honest disclosure of information would neither render it defective nor would amount to violation of provisions of the election bench noted that there may be cases where a candidate belonging to a particular religion, in which polygamy is not prohibited, has contracted multiple marriages. If the contention of the petitioner about the impermissibility to add a column in the Form-26 Affidavit is accepted, such a candidate would never be able to contest any election as disclosure of information about an additional wife would attract grounds under Section 100 of the Representation of People Act. This section gives details of grounds for declaring the election to be bench, thus, concluded that "the mere addition of a column to the Form-26 Affidavit would not attract a ground for challenging the election".- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Maharashtra
