Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has set aside the Gauhati High Court's decision which declared 2019 election of Dasanglu Pul as BJP MLA of Arunachal Pradesh Assembly as void due to non-disclosure of assets owned by her late husband, ex Chief Minister Khaliko Pul.

The BJP MLA had married Khaliko Pul in May 2015 as his third wife. However, Pul died intestate on August 09, 2016. He is survived by three wives and seven sons. 

A bench of Justices A S Bopanna and P S Narasimha allowed the appeal by Dasanglu after noting that the disclosure of all the properties in the column in Form 26 to indicate the properties belonging to the spouse would not arise in the case.

The court pointed out since the spouse was not alive and on his death the succession had opened, even otherwise the appellant had not claimed any interest in the properties which are the subject matter and belonged to the deceased spouse. 

"Hence it cannot be construed that there was a defect of substantial character in the present facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, this was not a case of improper acceptance of the nomination filed by the appellant," the bench declared.

The unsuccessful candidate Lupalum Kri contended the appellant who has an interest and claim over the properties of her spouse has not mentioned those in her affidavit. The respondent claimed that the non disclosure of the properties belonging to her spouse amounts to defects of substantial character and as such the nomination was liable to be rejected. The returning officer, had however rejected the objection and had accepted the nomination of the appellant, leading to filing of the election petition.

High Court found that the details of the property owned by the late husband of the appellant was not indicated in the relevant column of Form 26 which provided for mentioning the details of the properties owned by the spouse. 

The appellant, on her part, contended as per the custom followed by the Mishmi tribe, it is only the first wife who would succeed to the properties of the husband if the deceased at the time of death had more than one wife and as such the appellant had no claim whatsoever over the said properties. It is in that light, the appellant has examined the witnesses who have spoken with regard to the manner of inheritance among persons belonging to Mishmi tribe.

The bench said, "We are of the opinion that in the scope available to this court in an election petition it would not be appropriate for this Court to either examine the customary right or the right to inheritance."

It would be appropriate only to notice as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case where the appellant herself has no claim to the properties after the succession has opened, the non-mentioning of the properties as belonging to that of the spouse was a substantial defect, it said.

The court was also informed that the legal heir certificate issued in favour of the first wife was set aside.

The bench, however, found that neither as on the date of the death of the spouse nor on the date of filing the nomination for the election at the first instance in the year 2016 or at the point when the nomination was filed, the property left behind by the deceased was claimed by the appellant. 

"While weighing the entire case in the background of the evidence tendered and arriving at a decision based on preponderance of probability, the explanation put forth by the appellant in the fact situation herein will have to be accepted as plausible," the bench said.

It also noted the appellant while filing her nomination in Form No 26 and indicating the details of the properties standing in her name has indicated Plot No 230 in Tezu township, to which she was laying claim based on the assurance given to her by her late husband during his lifetime and has not laid claim to any other property which stood in the name of her deceased husband, to which, as contended by her the first wife has succeeded. 

Case Title: Dasanglu Pul vs. Lupalum Kri