Court finds Returning Officer's failure to re-verify 279 rejected postal ballots violated mandatory Election Commission guidelines, impacting election results; allegations of corrupt practices by winner dismissed for lack of particulars.
In a significant judgment dated April 6, 2026, the Karnataka High Court partially allowed the election petition filed by Mr. D.N. Jeevaraja challenging the election of Mr. T.D. Rajegowda as the MLA from Sringeri Assembly Constituency (No. 123). The Court found that the Returning Officer failed to comply with mandatory provisions regarding the re-verification of rejected postal ballots, a lapse that materially affected the election outcome, necessitating re-verification and a recount of postal ballots.
The background to the case involves the 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly elections, where the petitioner, representing the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), lost to the respondent, supported by the Indian National Congress, by a narrow margin of 201 votes. However, 279 postal ballots were rejected by the Returning Officer during counting. The petitioner contended that under the Election Commission of India's Handbook for Returning Officers (2023), when the victory margin is less than the number of rejected postal ballots, a mandatory re-verification of those ballots is required before declaring the result. The Returning Officer neither re-verified the rejected postal ballots nor provided reasons in writing for their rejection, and rejected the petitioner's application for a recount.
The petitioner also alleged corrupt practices by the respondent, including use of black money, overspending, hate speeches, false promises, paid news, truce with other candidates, and bogus votes. However, the Court held that such grave allegations must be pleaded with detailed material particulars and supported by an affidavit, as mandated under Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petitioner failed to provide sufficient particulars or proof, rendering the allegations vague and unsubstantiated.
Key Findings of the Court:
1. Binding Nature of the Handbook: The Court affirmed that the Handbook for Returning Officers, issued by the Election Commission under Article 324 of the Constitution, is binding and mandatory, not merely directory, especially where it governs the conduct of elections and counting processes.
2. Failure to Re-Verify Postal Ballots: The Returning Officer did not conduct the mandatory re-verification of the 279 rejected postal ballots, despite the victory margin (201 votes) being less than the number of rejected ballots. The Court noted no written reasons were recorded for rejection on the covers of postal ballots, violating Rule 54A of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, and the Handbook's guidelines.
3. Improper Rejection of Recount Application: The Returning Officer rejected the petitioner's recount request on flimsy grounds, including the presence of the petitioner's agents during counting. The Court found this rejection unjustified, especially since the Returning Officer declared results before considering the recount request.
4. Impact on Election Result: Given these procedural lapses, the Court held the election result was declared prematurely and improperly, warranting re-verification and recount of postal ballots.
5. Corrupt Practices Allegations: The Court dismissed all allegations of corrupt practices due to lack of specific pleadings and evidence. The petitioner did not meet the strict requirements under Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Order and Directions:
- The Court allowed the petition in part and directed the Returning Officer to re-verify the 279 rejected postal ballots in accordance with the 2023 Handbook guidelines, including assessing whether the ballots suffered from substantial defects.
- If any previously rejected postal ballots are found valid upon re-verification, the Returning Officer shall include them in the recount of all postal ballots and issue a fresh declaration of results if the recount alters the vote tally.
- The re-verification and recount must be completed within two weeks of receipt of the Court’s order.
- The Court refrained from declaring the entire election void, limiting relief to the recount of postal ballots only.
- The Court disposed of the petitioner's application for inspection of postal ballots as infructuous.
- Copies of the judgment were directed to be sent to the Election Commission of India, Chief Electoral Officer of Karnataka, District Election Officer of Chikkamagaluru, and the Returning Officer of Sringeri constituency.
Significance:
This judgment underscores the mandatory nature of Election Commission guidelines for Returning Officers and the critical importance of procedural compliance in the counting of postal ballots, especially in tightly contested elections. The ruling clarifies that failure to re-verify rejected postal ballots when the victory margin is less than the number of rejected ballots can materially affect election outcomes and warrants remedial action. However, it also reinforces the strict pleading and proof requirements for allegations of corrupt practices, emphasizing that vague or unsubstantiated claims will not suffice to overturn election results.
Bottom Line:
Election Law - The Returning Officer's failure to re-verify rejected postal ballots when the margin of victory is less than the number of rejected postal ballots is a breach of mandatory guidelines, necessitating re-verification and recounting.
Statutory provision(s): Article 324 of the Constitution of India, Sections 24, 64, 81, 83, 84, 100, 123, 125 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951; Rules 4A, 23, 24, 25, 54A, 63 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.
D.N. Jeevaraja v. T.D. Rajegowda, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2880201
