SC Turns Down Plea To Cancel Maharashtra Polls Over ‘Bogus Votes’ Claim

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to interfere with a Bombay High Court decision that had dismissed a petition challenging the validity of the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections.

The plea, filed by Vikhroli voter Chetan Ahire, alleged large-scale procedural lapses, including claims that lakhs of votes were cast after the official polling deadline.

Petition Alleged 76 Lakh “Late Votes”

Ahire’s petition alleged that more than 76 lakh votes were cast after 6 pm during polling, without adequate monitoring by the Election Commission of India (ECI). His counsel argued that data on these votes was necessary under election laws to ensure transparency and fairness.

The Bombay High Court, however, dismissed the plea earlier, describing it as a “gross abuse of the process of law” and questioning the petitioner’s legal standing to challenge the election process across all 288 constituencies in the state.

SC Bench Questions Locus

A Supreme Court bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh also raised questions about the petitioner’s locus standi, refusing to intervene in the High Court’s ruling.

The bench noted that the petition did not demonstrate a direct legal injury to the petitioner, a key requirement for such challenges under the Representation of the People Act.

Ambedkar Criticises SC’s Approach

Speaking in Delhi after the hearing, Ahire’s advocate and Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi chief Prakash Ambedkar criticised the apex court for not hearing the matter on merit.

“The question centred around who is Chetan Ahire. We said that he is a citizen of the country and a voter. But the court unfortunately did not hear it. If this is going to be the trend, where a citizen and a voter cannot file a petition or appeal, then in the coming days no one will file petitions,” Ambedkar said.

High Court Had Called Plea Weak

Earlier, the Bombay High Court pointed out that the plea was based on third-party information and did not qualify as a valid election petition under existing law.

“There is not a scratch of legal injury suffered by the petitioner,” the High Court had observed while dismissing the case.

With both the High Court and Supreme Court declining to entertain the plea, questions over the alleged “late votes” remain in the political domain, rather than the legal one.