The petition was brought by Udesh Shantaram Patekar, a member of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray faction), who lost the election by nearly 58,000 votes.
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has dismissed an election petition filed against Shiv Sena legislator Prakash Surve. The petition, submitted by Shiv Sena (UBT) candidate Udesh Patekar, alleged that Surve engaged in corrupt practices to secure his election victory. However, the court rejected the claims, stating that corruption is a serious allegation and cannot be made casually, as was done by the petitioner.
The petition was brought by Udesh Shantaram Patekar, a member of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray faction), who lost the election by nearly 58,000 votes. In the petition, Mr. Patekar accused Mr. Surve of engaging in corrupt practices such as giving bribes to voters, distributing campaign material in violation of election regulations, and attempting to sway voters by promising the construction of a Rs 1 crore community hall.
Justice Sandeep V. Marne rejected the petition emphasising on the need for strict compliance with legal provisions in election matters. “Filing of Election Petition seeking setting aside election of a democratically elected candidate is a special remedy created by the Statute and that all requirements stipulated therein must be scrupulously met with,” the court held.
Justice Marne further observed that allegations of electoral corruption are serious and carry criminal implications, and therefore cannot be made lightly or without clear and specific evidence. The court noted that the petition alleged that a shop owner Yogesh Jadhav was calling voters from Devipada area to his shop and distributing money to the voters for casting votes in favour of Mr.Surve and it was being done with the Shiv Sena candidate’s consent. However, no particulars were provided regarding how and in what manner Mr. Surve had consented for distribution of money. “There is no averment that Mr.Surve even knows Mr. Jadhav,” the court said.
Though the petitioner claimed to have submitted four video clips to support two of the corruption allegations, the materials presented consisted of multiple MP4 and JPEG files bundled together on a single pen drive. The judge criticised this approach, stating, “This casual approach on the part of the petitioner does not meet the strict requirements of pleadings. The Petitioner cannot dump multiple materials on a copiable electronic device and leave it for the returned candidate to identify the files copied therein.”
Justice Marne added that the petitioner had not provided the necessary details or clearly identified the video evidence, nor had he ensured that the materials were properly shared with the respondent. As a result, the petition could not be sustained.
