Non-Supply Of RTI Information After Election Results Is Not 'Corrupt Practice' U/S 123(7) Of RP Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that non-supply of information sought under the RTI Act after the declaration of election results does not constitute assistance for furthering the prospects of a candidate's election and therefore cannot constitute a corrupt practice under Section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Court observed that the election petition must contain specific pleadings demonstrating that the candidate or his agent obtained assistance for furthering the prospects of the candidate's election.
Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh was hearing an application under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC read with Sections 83, 86 and 87 of the RP Act seeking rejection of an Election Petition on the ground that the Petition does not disclose material facts constituting a cause of action as mandatorily required under Section 83 of the RP Act. The Election Petition sought to declare the election of the candidate from the 214 Pune Cantonment Legislative Assembly Constituency in the 2024 election void.
The Applicant contended that the allegation of corrupt practices under Section 123(7) of the RP Act is based on the non-supply of information sought under the RTI Act, which application was made after the declaration of the results. It was submitted that the allegation of EVM tampering is vague and no details have been given so as to challenge the elections.
On the issue of compliance with Section 61A of the RP Act due to failure to issue notification specifying that elections would be conducted through Voting Machine, the Court held that the issuance of a press note is sufficient compliance of Section 61A, and there is no requirement of issuance of a notification.
Next, while dealing with the contention around non-supply of information under the RTI Act, the Court noted that the election results were declared on November 23, 2024, whereas the RTI application was made on November 27, 2024. It observed that the essence of corrupt practice under Section 123(7) is an attempt by a candidate or his agent to procure assistance for furtherance of the prospects of that candidate's election from a person belonging to the specified classes, which is essentially referable to assistance procured during the election process.
Hence, refuting the contention, the Court observed:
“… the non-supply of the information under the RTI Act, after the results have been declared, does not constitute assistance for furthering of prospects of the candidate's election. The pleading of non-supply of information under RTI Act does not constitute a ground for corrupt practice.”
The Court further held that the Petition did not set out how the refusal to provide the information could be said to constitute assistance given to the returned candidate for furthering his prospects at the election. The Court also noted that Section 83 requires full particulars of any corrupt practice, including the names of the parties alleged to have committed such practice and the date and place of such practice, and found the Petition lacking in this regard.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and rejected the Election Petition.
Case Title: Sunil Dnyandev Kamble v. Ramesh Anandrao Bagwe [Application (L) No. 11620 of 2026 in Election Petition No. 32 of 2025]