The Supreme Court of India has overturned the Gauhati High Court’s dismissal of an election petition contesting the victory of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Kripanath Mallah in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Congress candidate and Senior Advocate Hafiz Rashid Ahmed Choudhury filed the petition, alleging that Mallah engaged in corrupt practices to secure his win in the Karimganj parliamentary constituency.
The Gauhati High Court had dismissed Choudhury’s petition in April 2025, citing technical defects without examining the case’s substantive merits. However, a Supreme Court Bench consisting of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran found that the alleged defects were not significant enough to warrant the dismissal of the petition at the preliminary stage.
Supreme Court Findings
The issue arose due to a Form 25 affidavit submitted by Choudhury in support of his allegations. The original affidavit on record with the High Court was affirmed before a commissioner of affidavits, but the copy served on Mallah lacked this affirmation. The Supreme Court ruled that this omission was insufficient grounds for dismissing the election petition entirely.
The Court clarified, “The defect under Section 83 does not entail peremptory dismissal under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act.” Consequently, the Supreme Court directed the High Court to verify if the original affidavit had the required attestation. If so, the High Court should proceed to examine the case on its merits, including the allegations of corrupt practices. If the attestation was missing, Choudhury would not be allowed to pursue those allegations, but the High Court should still consider any other grounds raised in the petition.
Allegations of Corrupt Practices
Choudhury’s petition included allegations of widespread rigging, booth capturing, voter intimidation, and bribery during the election campaign and polling day. He claimed several complaints were lodged with election officials and the Election Commission of India (ECI) without any resultant action. Additionally, he questioned the integrity of the counting process, highlighting an unexplained discrepancy of 3,811 votes between the ECI’s reported voter turnout and the final count.
More Read
Procedural Disputes
Before the Supreme Court, the key issue revolved around the authenticity of the copy of the election petition served on Mallah. The High Court had objected to the way pages were authenticated, noting that pages 1 to 84 were marked “attested to be true copy,” while pages 85 to 185 were marked “certified to be true copy.” The Supreme Court found that the Representation of the People Act, 1951, does not specify a particular form of attestation, and both endorsements effectively conveyed the same meaning.
Moreover, the Supreme Court dismissed Mallah’s claim about missing pages in the served copy, agreeing with the High Court that this objection seemed an afterthought, as it was not raised in earlier proceedings.
The Supreme Court’s decision to allow Choudhury’s appeal paves the way for the High Court to reassess the election petition on its merits. Senior Advocate Harin Pravinkant Raval represented Choudhury, while Advocate Wajeeh Shafiq appeared for Mallah.
