Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

october 2003

Supreme Court of India · 2003-10-30

Regu Mahesh @ Regu Maheswar Rao vs Rajendra Pratap Bhanj Dev And Anr

Citation / case number
AIR 2004 SUPREME COURT 38
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
Regu Mahesh @ Regu Maheswar Rao
Respondent
Rajendra Pratap Bhanj Dev And Anr
Author
Arijit Pasayat
Bench
Doraiswamy Raju, Arijit Pasayat

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of an election petition under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which found that the petition did not disclose a valid cause of action and failed to comply with the verification requirements under Order VI Rule 15 of the CPC. The Court emphasized that allegations of fraud regarding Scheduled Tribe status are treated with the same gravity as corrupt practices, thus necessitating strict adherence to procedural requirements. The Court affirmed the High Court's conclusion that the election petition was not maintainable due to improper form and lack of material facts.

Regu Mahesh @ Regu Maheswar Rao vs Rajendra Pratap Bhanj Dev And Anr · Niyam