Panchayat poll candidates have to disclose info on pending cases: SC upholds HC order

The Supreme Court has upheld the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s decision that candidates contesting panchayat elections are obliged to disclose information about cases pending against them.

A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh upheld the High Court’s decision of October 16, 2024, affirming the dismissal of ‘pradhan’ of Pangna village panchayat in Mandi district and said, “It is a case where he deliberately filed a false affidavit/undertaking concealing the factum of the pendency of a criminal case against him. The concealment of that material fact per se was a valid ground to annul his election.”

In any case, the misconduct attributed to petitioner Basant Lal did not require reference to any provision of the Act, rules or regulations, it said. Basant was declared panchayat pradhan on January 17, 2021. Jitender Mahajan, who had finished third in the elections, challenged his election before the authorised Sub-Divisional Magistrate, contending that Basant deliberately did not disclose the pendency of a criminal case registered against him.

The SDM-cum-authorised officer (election tribunal) found that a criminal case was pending trial against Basant where a punishment of up to two years could be awarded, and declared the petitioner’s election as null and void.

Aggrieved by the order of the tribunal, Basant filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner-cum-appellant authority, who dismissed it on May 1, 2023. Thereafter, he approached the High Court against the order of the Deputy Commissioner.

Basant moved the top court against the November 7, 2024, order of a Division Bench of the Himachal High Court, affirming the view taken by a single-judge Bench on his disqualification from holding the post of pradhan of the gram panchayat.

However, the top court said, “We fail to find any merit as far as the petitioner’s challenge to the impugned order(s) and judgment(s) of the High Court is concerned. We say so for the reason that the regulations framed by the State Election Commission have rightly been held by the High Court to be a piece of subordinate legislation and, thus, the candidates contesting the panchayat elections were obligated to comply with the provisions of the same.”

Basant had contended that on February 2, 2025, he was disqualified from contesting elections for a period of six years due to the previous non-disclosure of a criminal case. The Bench, however, noted that Basant was thereafter acquitted in the criminal case, the details of which he allegedly concealed and suffered disqualification.

On the issue of his disqualification for six years, the Supreme Court said that the punishment was harsh, as he had been acquitted in the criminal case in question. “Turning lastly to the order dated February 2, 2025, by way of which the petitioner has been precluded from contesting elections for the next six years, we do not want to express any opinion on this order’s merits, as it is a subsequent event that was not the subject matter of the challenge before the High Court,” it added.

The Bench noted that the petitioner was said to have been acquitted in the criminal case and stayed the February 2, 2025, order to enable the petitioner to contest the elections to the post of the pradhan of the gram panchayat, if it is held in the near future. It seemed that barring him for six years from contesting elections was “prima facie harsh and disproportionate punishment to the nature of allegations attributed to him”, it said. (With PTI inputs)

Himachal Tribune