BRIJ MOHAN vs SAT PAL

The Supreme Court held that the rejection of Dog Ram's nomination paper by the Returning Officer was invalid as the errors in the electoral roll particulars were not of a substantial character under Section 33(4) of The Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Court found that both the candidate and proposer were registered voters and qualified to contest the election, and the Returning Officer's failure to inform them of discrepancies constituted a misstep. The High Court's ruling that the nomination was improperly rejected was upheld.