Supreme Court: Election petitions must be filed by petitioner, not counsel

The case concerns whether an election petition must be presented by the petitioner in person under Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and if failure to do so renders the petition liable to dismissal under Section 86(1).

Who it concerns: Petitioner: V. Pon. Paneerselvam; Respondents: S. Regupathy and others; Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra.

What the court decided

• The Court examined the mandatory nature of personal presentation of election petitions under Section 81(1) of the RP Act.
• The Court noted that Section 86(1) mandates dismissal of petitions not complying with Section 81.
• The Court analyzed the legislative history, noting that the 1966 Amendment removed provisions allowing presentation by an authorized person or registered post.
• The Court discussed the High Court's competence to frame rules for the receipt of election petitions as an incidental administrative power, citing Jamal Uddin Ahmad v. Abu Saleh Najmuddin.

Also in the document

• The Court emphasized that the RP Act is a special and self-contained code requiring strict adherence to its procedural requirements.
• The Court distinguished between judicial functions (which are inalienable) and administrative/ministerial functions (which can be entrusted to High Court officers).
• The judgment is marked as 'REPORTABLE'.