The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to examine the correctness of the Delhi high court order on April 24 that dismissed a petition to set aside Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) legislator Vishesh Ravi’s election from Delhi’s Karol Bagh constituency in 2020 on the ground that the petition had infructuous due to the passage of time and fresh assembly elections being held in 2025.
A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan agreed to examine the issue on a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) member of Parliament Yogender Chandolia who lost to Ravi in the 2020 Delhi elections. Ravi won the seat in 2025 as well
During Monday’s hearing, the bench also pointed out that fresh elections had already taken place but agreed to hear the petition after senior advocate Arvind Kumar Gupta, who appeared for Chandolia along with advocate C Parkash, insisted that the high court had erred in failing to consider the question of law which required a judicial determination on whether a false declaration with regard to educational qualification in the nomination form would amount to corrupt practice under Section 123 (4) of the Representation of People Act.
Chandolia fought the 2020 assembly polls from Karol Bagh constituency and lost to Ravi by a margin of more than 67,000 votes.
In his petition, Chandolia alleged that Ravi declared his educational qualification as Bachelors in Commerce (B Com) in 2013. Two years later, in 2015 the column in Form 26 reflected “pursuing B.A Programme”. However, in the 2020 polls, he declared himself to be Class 10 pass.
Noting the discrepancy, Chandolia alleged that Ravi made a false declaration and his election was liable to be set aside on this ground. He had argued in the high court that furnishing false information amounted to corrupt practice under the election law.
The high court held that the Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act covers false statements made about another candidate aimed to hurt their electoral prospects and did not cover Ravi’s disclosure of his educational qualifications.
Ultimately, the high court ruled since Ravi’s 2020 term had ended and he had been re-elected in 2025, Chandolia’s election petition had become infructuous.
“Even if the case is tried and the allegations are found to be correct, then also, the Respondent no.1 (Ravi) cannot be held guilty of corrupt practice in light of the pleadings made. Since the term of the Assembly is over and fresh elections have been held in the year 2025, the election petition is liable to be declared infructuous.”
