Delhi HC dismisses plea against ex-MLA over educational qualification

Delhi HC dismisses Yogender Chandolia's plea against ex-MLA Vishesh Ravi over false educational qualification. The court ruled the petition cited the wrong law and couldn't be examined, rendering it infructuous after the 2025 elections.

The Delhi High Court, while dealing with an election petition filed by BJP Leader Yogender Chandolia against former Karol Bagh MLA Vishesh Ravi, has held that allegations of false disclosure of educational qualifications cannot be examined under the specific legal provision invoked in the case, ultimately rendering the petition infructuous after the 2025 Assembly elections.

The Division Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar made it clear that for deciding the issue, it would proceed on the assumption that Chandolia had raised a "triable and arguable case."

Incorrect Legal Grounding for Allegations

The Court held that Chandolia's entire case was based on Section 123(4), which deals with false statements made about other candidates to damage their electoral prospects. Since the allegation in the present case was that Vishesh Ravi made incorrect statements about his own educational qualification, the Court ruled that such a claim does not fall within the scope of Section 123(4).

Crucially, the Bench observed that the allegations may or may not fall under another provision, Section 123(2) (undue influence), but since that ground was not properly pleaded, the Court could not examine it.

Strict Pleading Rules and Final Outcome

The Court reiterated that election law requires strict and precise pleadings, and courts cannot go beyond the exact provisions cited by a petitioner. It held that in the absence of proper legal grounding, even serious allegations cannot lead to setting aside an election, as doing so would disturb the "mandate of the masses."

Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ajmera Shyam, the High Court also noted that issues relating to educational qualifications are considered supplementary disclosures and may not always be sufficient to invalidate an election unless they are of substantial impact.

The Court stated that since the term of the Delhi Assembly had already ended and fresh elections were held in 2025, the Court held that Chandolia's petition had now become infructuous.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)