Representation of People Act | Election Petition Must Be Personally Presented By Petitioner Before HC: Meghalaya High Court
The Meghalaya High Court held that strict adherence under 81(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 an election petition must be personally presented by the petitioner before the authorized officer of the High Court.
The Court remarked that non-compliance with this requirement is not a mere procedural irregularity but a fatal defect, attracting dismissal under Section 86(1), as improper presentation goes to the of maintainability of an election petition.
Justice H.S. Thangkhiew remarked that:“...the Representation of the People Act, 1951, mandates that election petition must be presented personally by the petitioner to the authorized officer of the High Court, and that non-compliance of the same would lead to dismissal of the election petition for improper presentation.”
Background:
The petitioner challenged the election of the returned candidate by filing an election petition before the High Court. The petitioner raised a preliminary objection under Section 86 of the RP Act contending that the petition was liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with Sections 81, 82, and 83 of the Act.
After examining the evidence, the Court observed that the election petition was not presented as per the mandatory requirements of Section 81(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Further there multiple material inconsistencies and contradictions, in the testimony of the election petitioner and his witnesses, majorly regarding dates of notarization and filing, the manner of presentation, and the procedural steps followed.
Also, the petitioner failed to establish that he had ersonally presented the election petition before the Stamp Reporter, as he could not even recall the basic details. The stamp reporter confirmed that the election petition was not presented before her and the Notary also could not say as to whether the election petitioner was present before him, when the election petition was notarized.
Thus, the Court dismissed the election petition and held that the petitioner failed to prove personal presentation.
Case Name: Shri Titosstar Well Chyne V/s Shri Gavin Miguel & Ors.
Case No.: El. Pet. No.2 of 2023
Date of Decision: 02.04.2026
For the petitioners: Mr. N. Jotendra Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. A. Kharshiing, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. A.S. Pandey, Adv. with Mr. A.M. Pala, Adv. Ms. K.C.H. Nongrum, Adv.