‘Even If Acquitted, Candidate Must Disclose Offence In Nomination Form’ If there is non-disclosure of a previous conviction by a candidate, a voter is deprived of making an informed and advised choice, SC said NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that non-disclosure of conviction in a minor offence, even if overturned by higher courts, in a nomination form would lead to disqualification of an elected candidate as the law mandating revealing criminal antecedents operates in full rigour irrespective of the nature of the crime. Poonam was unseated from the municipal councillor’s post in Nagar Parishad, Bhikangaon, Madhya Pradesh, as she was convicted in a cheque bounce case and sentenced to one year imprisonment with a direction to pay compensation. She had failed to mention her conviction in the nomination form. Poonam claimed that her conviction was set aside by a higher court and hence her election could not be set aside because of a conviction that no longer existed.A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar rejected the petitioner’s plea to save her from disqualification as non-mention of conviction in a cheque bounce case, which is a not a serious crime or touches upon moral turpitude, would not materially affect the election.Writing the judgment, Justice Chandurkar said, “Once it is found that there has been non-disclosure of a previous conviction by a candidate, it creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. A voter is thus deprived of making an informed and advised choice. It would be a case of suppression/non-disclosure by such a candidate, which renders the election void.”The bench said non-furnishing of information pertaining to criminal antecedents has the effect of causing undue influence, which creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. The court said it was clear that by failing to disclose her conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the petitioner suppressed material information and thus failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Rule 24-A (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika Nirvachan Niyam, 1994.”Acceptance of her nomination form has therefore been rightly held to be improper. She being the returned candidate, her election was rendered void. It is thus obvious that on account of such wrongful acceptance of her nomination form, the election was materially affected,” it said, while noting that Poonam had contested the bypoll for the councillor post, which fell vacant because of her disqualification, and lost.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideos’Mungerilal Ke Sapne’: BJP’s Sunil Pintu Takes Dig At RJD-Cong, Exudes Confidence Of Sitamarhi WinPakistan Fires Into Afghanistan, Breaks Ceasefire Amid Turkey Peace Talks: Taliban Confirms’RJD Put Katta To Congress’ Head’: PM Modi Slams Mahagathbandhan In Bihar RallyIndia Shocked As UAE Frees Mahadev Scam Accused, Cites No Extradition Request Amid Paper TrailBihar Deputy CM Vijay Sinha Accuses RJD MLC Of Drunken Chaos, Faces Off Amid Voting In LakhisaraiDelhi’s Fake ‘Professor’ and Team Pulled Off a ₹50 Crore Money Heist Inspired by Netflix Crime Drama’Can’t Think Of Another Trade Talk…’: Piyush Goyal, Todd McClay Comment On India–New Zealand FTAINS Ikshak Commissioned With 80% Indigenous Tech, New Hydrographic Survey Vessel Joins Indian NavyDonald Trump’s Trade Weapon Tested: US Supreme Court Weighs Limits of Emergency Powers, Authority’BIG ZERO’: PM Modi Takes Massive Dig At RJD, Cong’s ‘Jungle Raj’ Report Card for Bihar in Araria123PhotostoriesSamantha Ruth Prabhu’s time-turner necklace and purple gown are the talk of Abu DhabiFrom undergoing surgery to remove 22% of her liver with an 11-centimeter tumor to continuing a two-year targeted therapy; Dipika Kakar talks about her liver cancer treatmentCortisol cocktail: What happens when you take this viral drink everyday for a month5 breathtaking winter migrants in India every bird lover must seeWhy Sadhguru recommends consuming Carrot Salad with Peanuts and DatesWhy does this Indian temple open only for 12 days in a yearHis/ her story: “Whenever things are fine between my husband and me, my mother-in-law interferes and causes fights… What should I do?”‘Kaun?’, ‘Talvar’ to ‘Gone Girl’: 7 must-watch thrillers that will keep you guessing till the very end9 beautiful and unique baby girl names that begin with letter ‘R’How to spot a fake person: 5 clear signs you shouldn’t miss, as per psychology123Hot PicksStock market holidayBank HolidayBihar Election 2025Gold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays NovemberBank Holidays NovemberTop TrendingMarshawn Kneeland Cause of DeathJoe AlwynAshton JeantyFake Online TradingMLB World Series ChampionsMath Problem Solving StrategiesBengaluru AirportSaudi Arabia Makkah Grand MosqueVanessa BryantCarolina Panthers
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that non-disclosure of conviction in a minor offence, even if overturned by higher courts, in a nomination form would lead to disqualification of an elected candidate as the law mandating revealing criminal antecedents operates in full rigour irrespective of the nature of the crime. Poonam was unseated from the municipal councillor’s post in Nagar Parishad, Bhikangaon, Madhya Pradesh, as she was convicted in a cheque bounce case and sentenced to one year imprisonment with a direction to pay compensation. She had failed to mention her conviction in the nomination form. Poonam claimed that her conviction was set aside by a higher court and hence her election could not be set aside because of a conviction that no longer existed.A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar rejected the petitioner’s plea to save her from disqualification as non-mention of conviction in a cheque bounce case, which is a not a serious crime or touches upon moral turpitude, would not materially affect the election.Writing the judgment, Justice Chandurkar said, “Once it is found that there has been non-disclosure of a previous conviction by a candidate, it creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. A voter is thus deprived of making an informed and advised choice. It would be a case of suppression/non-disclosure by such a candidate, which renders the election void.”The bench said non-furnishing of information pertaining to criminal antecedents has the effect of causing undue influence, which creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. The court said it was clear that by failing to disclose her conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the petitioner suppressed material information and thus failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of Rule 24-A (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Palika Nirvachan Niyam, 1994.“Acceptance of her nomination form has therefore been rightly held to be improper. She being the returned candidate, her election was rendered void. It is thus obvious that on account of such wrongful acceptance of her nomination form, the election was materially affected,” it said, while noting that Poonam had contested the bypoll for the councillor post, which fell vacant because of her disqualification, and lost.
