(1)
Ļ¯ೇಷ ªಾಜÍ ಪĦÎೆ
PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS SECRETARIAT (ELECTIONS)
NOTIFICATION
No. DPAR 41 CHUTHAA 2025, Bengaluru, Dated: 27th January 2026.
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi.
Dated: 8th December, 2025
17 Agrahayana, 1947 (Saka)
NOTIFICATION
No. 82/KT-HP/3/2024:- In pursuance of Section 106 (a) of the Representation of the
People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), the Election Commission of India hereby publishes the
judgment/orders of the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru dated: 31.07.2025 in the Election
Petition No. 3/2024.
¨sÁUÀ – 4
Part – IV
, 27
, 2026
, 07
)
BENGALURU, TUESDAY, 27, JANUARY, 2026 ( MAGHA , 07, SHAKAVARSHA, 1947)
. 100
No. 100
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
ELECTION PETITION NO.3 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. MR. SUBAN KHAN
S/O H. UMMAR KHAN
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT NO.1025, 3RDMAIN
2ND CROSS, KTJ NAGAR
DAVANAGERE - 577 002.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VENKATESH P. DALWAI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI SHIVARAJ B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. PRABHA MALLIKARJUN
W/O S.S. MALLIKARJUN
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO.2636/1, "SHIVAPARVATHI"
MCC 'B' BLOCK
DAVANAGERE - 577 004.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASHANT F. GOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GOUTAM
S. BHARADWAJ, ADVOCATE)
THIS ELECTION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
80, 81, 100 READ WITH SECTION 123 OF THE
REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT, 1951, PRAYING
TO DECLARE THAT THE ELECTION HELD IN RESPECT
OF 13, DAVANAGERE PARLIAMENT CONSTITUENCY,
3
DAVANAGERE ON 07.04.2024 IS ILLEGAL AND VOID,
ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL
HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
ORAL ORDER
1.
The election petition is filed challenging the election of
respondent
No.1
to
DavanagereLokasabha
constituency in the general elections held in May 2024.
Her election is sought to be set aside on the ground that
she and her agents indulged in corrupt practices as per
Section 123(1)(A)(b) of the Representation of the
People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
2.
Section 123(1)(A) of the Act reads as under:
"123. Corrupt practices.—The following shall be deemed to
be corrupt practices for the purposes of this Act:—
(1)
“Bribery” that is to say,—
(A) any gift, offer or promise by a candidate or his agent or
by any other person with the consent of a candidate
or his election agent of any gratification, to any
person whomsoever, with the object,
directly or indirectly of inducing—
(a)
a person to stand or not to stand as, or to
withdraw or not to withdraw from being a
candidate at an election, or
4
(b)
an elector to vote or refrain from voting at
an election, or as a reward to—
(i)
a person for having so stood or not
stood, or for having withdrawn or not
having
withdrawn his candidature; or
(ii)
an elector for having voted or
refrained from voting;"
3.
The specific instances of bribery alleged against
respondent No.1 and her agents in the election petition
are that:
(1)
Issuance of 'Congress Guarantee Card' by the
Indian National Congress Party.
(2)
Distribution of money and goods to the voters on
06.04.2024.
4.
In the course of the arguments, the petitioner has
submitted that in the light of the decision of this Court
passed in E.P.No.7/2024, he does not intend to argue
that issuance of 'Congress Guarantee Card' amounts
to a corrupt practice as per Section 123 of the Act as it
has already been negatived by this Court in its earlier
ruling. He submits that he would confine his arguments
to the specific instance of corrupt practices alleged in
paragraphs 12 and 12A of the election petition.
5.
Paragraphs 12 and 12A of the election petition read as
under:
5
"12. The Petitioner submits that on 06-04-2024 the
Respondent no.1 has further made corrupt practice by
distributing money of Rs.1 Crore to the voters at KTJ Nagar
Booth through the Corporator namely Abdul Latheef, Zakir,
Chaman Saab, Pandit and a sum of Rs.1 Crore at
Bashanagar Booth through A.B.Rahim and a sum of Rs.1
Crore at Vinobanagar Booth through Corporator Nagaraj
and a sum of Rs.1 Crore at Ahamed Nagar Booth through
Hur Banu and a sum of Rs.1 Crore at Basavarajpet Booth
through Syed Charlie and a sum of Rs.1 Crore at
Chamarajapete Booth through Chaman Sab and a sum of
Rs.1 Crore at Siddarameshwara Badawane Booth through
A.B.Rahim and a sum of Rs.1 Crore at
Basha Nagar Booth through Ahemed Kabir Khan. The
Respondent No.1 has distributed a sum of Rs.2 thousand to
Rs.3 thousand per vote. The Respondent No.1 has also
issued guarantee card to the voters of the constituency only
to see that the votes are casted in her favour. In the said
act of issuing guarantee card amounts to corrupt practice.
The said guarantee card along with hand bill is hereby
furnished and marked as Annexure K.
Amended para; VOD:- 29-4-2025
Para 12A) It is submitted that Husband of the Respondent
No 1 i.e Sri SS Mallikarjuna and father in law of Respondent
No 1 Sri Shamnur Shivashankarappa with the consent of
Respondent herein distributed the pressure cookers to the
voters in order to vote for Respondent after the code of
conduct has been declared. Further Rs 2000 was
distributed to each of the voter in the area of KTJ Nagar
booth by the congress corporaters already named in
previous para in order to secure the votes for Respondent,
the distribution of money was done at the behest of
Respondent
and
with
her
consent
herein
thereby
Respondent has committed corrupt practice which
6
has materially effected the election in favour of Respondent
herein."
6.
The election petition, as filed originally, did not
contain the allegations made in paragraph No.12A and
it was inserted subsequent to an amendment and at
the time of making the amendment application, the
counsel for the petitioner has categorically stated that
the said corrupt practice also took place on 06.04.2024
and does not pertain to a date subsequent to it.
7.
I.A.No.2/2024 has been filed by respondent No.1
under Order VII Rule 11(a) of CPC read with Section
86(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,
which reads as under:
"HEREIN, the application on behalf of Respondent No.1 is
as under:
For the reasons sworn in the accompanying affidavit, it is
respectfully prayed that, the present Election Petition filed
by the Petitioner be kindly rejected with cost for failure to
disclose cause of action in the interest of justice and
equity."
8.
The aforementioned I.A. is filed on the ground that
'Congress Guarantee Card' is a policy decision
adopted by the Indian National Congress party. It is a
policy promise made by the Indian National Congress
party and it does not amount to a corrupt practice by
respondent No.1 and also on the ground that the
specific allegation of corrupt practice alleged in the
7
election petition pertains to a date prior to filing of the
nomination
by
respondent
No.1
which
is
on
12.04.2024 and her nomination was accepted and she
was declared as a candidate from the Indian National
Congress party on 22.04.2024, and thus, any actions
done by herself or her agents prior to she filing her
nomination cannot be termed as a corrupt practice for
the purposes of Section 123 of the Act.
9.
As already mentioned above, the petitioner does not
press on the issuance of 'Congress Guarantee Card'
amounting to a corrupt practice. However, in respect
of the specific instance of corrupt practice alleged in
paras 12 and 12A of the election petition, it is
submitted that respondent No.1 was declared and
nominated as a candidate for DavanagereLokasabha
constituency by the Indian National Congress Party on
23.03.2024 and any corrupt practice indulged by
herself and her agents attracts the provisions of
Section 123 of the Act and on the said ground, it is
prayed that the application be dismissed and a trial be
conducted regarding the allegations made against
respondent No.1.
10. The question that arises for consideration is what is the
relevant date when a person becomes a candidate for
the purposes of Section 123 of the Act?
11. Section 79(b) of the Act reads as follows:
8
"79. Definitions.—In this Part and in [Part VII] unless the
context otherwise requires,—
(a)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(b)
“candidate” means a person who has been or claims to
have been duly nominated as a candidate at any
election."
12. Thus, a person becomes a candidate after he has been
duly nominated as a candidate any at election. The
Hon'ble Apex Court has answered the same in Subhash
Desai vs. Sharad J.Rao and Others [1994 Supp (2) SCC
446]. In paragraph 18 of the said judgment, it has been
held as under:
"18. On behalf of the appellant, it was then pointed
out that in election petition, while alleging corrupt
practices, reference has been made in respect of the
speeches and publications, of period prior to 31-11990,
which was the date when nomination papers were filed.
The publications and speeches alleged to have been made
prior to 31-1-1990 have to be ignored because the framers
of the Act, required the High Court to judge the conduct of
the candidate, his agent or persons with the consent of the
candidate or his election agent, only after a person
becomes a candidate for the particular election. A person
becomes a candidate for the election in question only after
filing the nomination paper. In this connection, reference
may be made to Section 79(b) of the Act which defines
'candidate' to mean a person, who has been or claims to
have been duly nominated as a candidate at any election.
Section 34 of the Act says that a candidate shall not be
deemed to be duly nominated for election from a
constituency unless he deposits or causes to be deposited
the amounts prescribed in the said section. When a person
9
becomes a candidate, was examined by this Court in the
well-known case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain and
it was held: (SCC p. 64, para 146)
"The 1951 Act uses the expression "candidate" in
relation to several offences for the purpose of affixing
liability with reference to a person being a candidate. If no
time be fixed with regard to a person being a candidate it
can be said that from the moment a person is elected he
can be said to hold himself out as a candidate for the next
election."
Recently, this Court in the case of Mohan Rawale v.
Damodar Tatyaba[(1994)2 SCC 392] has said:
"We hold that all the averments in paragraphs
1 to 20 of the memorandum of election petition
insofar as they refer to a period prior to 23-4-1991
cannot amount to allegations of corrupt practice."
This cut-off date 23-4-1991 was fixed with reference to the
date when nomination papers were filed by the appellant
concerned, because since that date the appellant will be
deemed to have legally acquired the status of a candidate.
According to us, any allegation of corrupt practice against
the appellant, made by the respondent in respect of the
period prior to the filing of nomination by the appellant on
31-1-1990, cannot be taken into consideration for judging
the legality or validity of his election."
13.
Thus, a person becomes a candidate as per Section
79(b) of the Act for the purposes of Section 123 of the Act
only upon filing of nomination and not earlier to it. In the
instant case, respondent No.1 has become a candidate only
after 12.04.2024 (the date on which she has filed her
nomination) and not earlier to it. Thus, any act done by
10
respondent No.1 prior to 12.04.2024, does not become a
corrupt practice for the purposes of Section 123 of the Act.
14.
Admittedly, all the specific allegations of corrupt
practice alleged against respondent No.1 is said to have
been made on 06.04.2024, much earlier to respondent No.1
becoming a candidate.
15.
Thus, even if all the allegations made against
respondent No.1 in the election petition are held to be true,
the petitioner cannot succeed in the election petition and
under the circumstances, it has to be construed that the
election petition has been filed without a valid cause of
action.
16.
For the aforementioned reasons, I.A.No.2/2024 is
hereby allowed and the election petition is hereby rejected.
Pending IAs., if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN)
JUDGE
By Order,
(PAWAN DIWAN)
SECRETARY
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
By order and in the name of the
Governor of Karnataka
( MADHU A.C )
Under Secretary to Government
D.P.A.R (Elections)
[
ಮುದÎಕರು ²ಾಗೂ ಪÎಾಶಕರು:- ಸಂಕಲ£ಾĩಾĸಗಳ…, ಕ£ಾಟಕ ªಾಜÍಪತÎ, ಸಾĸ ೇಂದÎ ಮುದΞಾಲಯ, ¦ೆಂಗಳˆರು
R.N.I. No. KARBIL/2001/47147 POSTAL REGN. No. RNP/KA/BGS/2202/2017-19
Licensed to post without prepayment WPP No. 297
THAMMAIAH
Digitally signed by THAMMAIAH
DN: c=IN, o=Centre for e-Governance,
2.5.4.20=be54f34f4e31eae50203ca7fab5ceb3794f20a8460a2582ef28294d43b8f8b16,
ou=department of printing stationery and Publication,CID - 7048443, postalCode=560001,
st=Karnataka,
serialNumber=4d9b284dcc53d39f1425f50485de07dd86efa302a3fce3729eddea0c1b5098e0,
cn=THAMMAIAH
Date: 2026.01.27 17:38:27 +05'30'