Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Simultaneous Security Deposit Rule in Election Petitions

Court rules that compliance with Rule 19(2) is met when security deposit is made during the filing process, dismissing objections raised by respondents.

In a recent decision, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Deepak Khot, has clarified the interpretation of Rule 19(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipality (Election Petition) Rules, 1962. The judgment was delivered in the civil revision case between Shankar Prasad Gupta and Lovkesh Singh, focusing on the compliance of mandatory provisions regarding security deposits during the filing of election petitions.

The petitioner, Shankar Prasad Gupta, challenged the order passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Sidhi, citing non-compliance with Rule 19(2), which mandates a security deposit of Rs. 250 at the time of presenting a revision petition. The respondent, Lovkesh Singh, argued that the petition should be dismissed as the deposit was not made at the exact time of presentation, as required by the rules.

The court examined the procedural aspects of the filing process, highlighting that the presentation of a case is deemed complete only after scrutiny by the filing section. The petitioner had deposited the security amount simultaneously during the filing process, which was endorsed by the scrutiny assistant. The court found that the receipt of the deposit was included in the petition documents before scrutiny, thus fulfilling the requirement of Rule 19(2).

Justice Khot further referenced previous cases, including Deepak Kumar Soni v. Ashok Kumar and Rabindra Kumar Upadhyay v. Sub-Divisional Officer, to support the ruling. These cases underscored the importance of the security deposit being part of the filing process rather than the exact timing of its deposit.

The judgment emphasized that the mode of deposit, whether in the name of the petitioner or their counsel, was immaterial as long as the security amount was duly deposited during the filing process. The court rejected the respondent's objections and upheld the maintainability of the petition.

This decision provides clarity on the procedural requirements for filing election petitions, ensuring that the simultaneous deposit of security during the filing process satisfies the mandatory provisions. The ruling is expected to streamline future election petition filings, reinforcing the procedural integrity of the judicial process.

Bottom Line:

Compliance with mandatory provisions under Rule 19(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipality (Election Petition) Rules, 1962, regarding the deposit of security amount at the time of presentation of revision petition is fulfilled if the deposit is made simultaneously during the filing process and becomes part of the petition before scrutiny.

Statutory provision(s): Rule 19(2) of Madhya Pradesh Municipality (Election Petition) Rules, 1962, Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961, Article 26 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961.

Shankar Prasad Gupta v. Lovkesh Singh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2806088