Your Scrutiny Of Candidate Before Giving Him Seat Was Not Proper: SC Tells Congress's Substitute Candidate In Indore Lok Sabha Seat Where Main Candidate Withdrew And Joined BJP

The official candidate Akshay Kanti Bam withdrew his nomination and joined the Bhartiya Janta Party, limiting the contest to the BJP candidate and some independents. Singh filed the Special Leave Petition assailing the order passed by the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissing his appeal which challenged his rejection of candidature.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan heard the matter and refused to allow the petition citing delay on the part of the Petitioner in approaching the Court at the last moment when the scope for interference by the Court is little.

Senior Advocate Ravi Shankar Jandhyala appearing on behalf of Singh referred to the Form-B of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

Justice Viswanathan remarked, “When you are a dummy candidate background, you would have taken 10 proposers, I know it is required for an independent(candidate), but then you step in and you are given the reserved symbol…now you did not even take that much precaution. What kind of seriousness is this? Normally, you should take a precaution till he withdraws. What is your status now?”

On being informed about the chronology of events Justice Viswanathan asked smiling, “Why did he(Akshay Bam) withdraw?...your scrutiny of him before giving him a seat was not proper…”

Advocate for Singh said that after Bam withdrew his nomination, the Petitioner was supposed to step in, but that did not happen.

Justice Kant also said, “In such matters even a one-hour delay is important…why did it take you seven days to find the present SLP?...in these cases delay is very very material…you should have mentioned before us immediately.”

In this case, Singh and Akshay Kanti Bam submitted their nomination forms and were to contest the general election from Indore. The INC had declared Bam as the ‘approved candidate’ and Singh as the ‘substitute candidate’ by issuing Form-B as per the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

Thereafter, while scrutinizing the nomination forms, the Returning Officer rejected the form of Moti Singh on the ground that he was only a 'substitute candidate' and Akshay Bam had been declared as an 'approved candidate'. On April 29, 2024, Bam, being an approved candidate, withdrew his nomination form to contest the parliamentary elections from the Bhartiya Janta Party.

Justice Kant also remarked that he is not even a candidate as his nomination form was rejected and the question of being a ‘substitute candidate’ would not arise.

The Court said, “Unheard-of things are happening…you should have come earlier. You could have asked for provisional nomination from High Court and then come to us…Something we could have done…had you come on time…maybe this question of law be raised in an election petition…even as an elector you can challenge…We will keep it open.”

The Court said, "We have our limitations as well...the problem is the time has run and now we cannot derail anything. Have you been continued as a candidate, things would have been different. The question of law is open."

The High Court had observed, "Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the principles laid down in the case of Election Commission of India (supra) and Manda Jagannath (supra), we find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents. When the impugned order is tested on the anvil of the above facts, we do not perceive any error therein....Accordingly, this appeal being bereft of merit and substance is hereby dismissed."

Cause Title: Moti Singh v. Election Commission of India and Ors. (Diary No. 21562 of 2024)