The Supreme Court has held that allegations of filing a false affidavit during the electoral process constitute an offence against society and must be properly investigated, even if the Magistrate initially took cognizance under an incorrect legal provision.

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh was dealing with a challenge to criminal proceedings initiated against a municipal councillor accused of suppressing details of immovable properties owned by her husband in the affidavit filed during local body elections.

The Court noted that the Magistrate had issued process under Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. However, the provision applies to parliamentary and state legislative elections and not municipal elections governed by state laws. Despite this error, the Court held that the defect was curable and did not vitiate the proceedings.

Emphasizing the settled principle that cognizance is taken of an offence and not of an offender, the Bench observed that the essence of the allegation was the filing of a false election affidavit. Such conduct, if established, may attract penal consequences under the Indian Penal Code and cannot be ignored merely because the wrong statutory provision was invoked at the initial stage.

The Court also interpreted the Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules, 1994, and held that a candidate is required to disclose assets belonging not only to themselves but also to their spouse and dependents. The Bench rejected the argument that properties exclusively owned by a spouse need not be disclosed.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the cognizance order and remanded the matter to the Magistrate for taking cognizance afresh under the appropriate legal provisions and proceeding in accordance with law. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations.

Case: Chandrikaben Kishor Dafda v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (2026 INSC 665)
Decision Date: July 1, 2026.

Representation:-

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Namit Saxena, AOR

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR, Mr. Rishi Yadav, Adv., Mr. Sumant Datt, AOR, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Saurav Kumar, Adv., Mr. Satya Prakash Narain Tripathi, Adv.