“Don't Disown Children To Get Elected and Grab Political Post” Supreme Court Upholds Disqualification Of Shiv Sena Leader

The Supreme Court recently upheld the Bombay High Court order of disqualifying a Shiv Sena leader Anita Ramdas Magar whose election as a corporator of the Solapur Municipal Corporation in Maharashtra was set aside for having more than two children.

On July 12, 2021 bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Hemant Gupta while upholding the High Court’s order said,

“We’re not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The special leave petition is disposed of accordingly, dismissed. Pending applications stand disposed of.”

According to Hindustan Times, the Court also said that,

“You have put a cross to bear for your child just because you wanted to get elected. Don’t disown your children only because you want to get elected and get a political post,”

The Bombay High Court order dated May 24, 2021 passed by bench of Justice CV Bhadang upheld the Trial Court order wherein the Court by setting aside Anita Ramdas Magar’s election as a Councilor of the Solapur Municipal Corporation allowed the election petition filed by Bhagyalaxmi Prakash Mahanta.

Factual Background

Bhagyalaxmi Prakash Mahanta who secured the second highest votes had challenged the election of Anita Ramdas Magar (Shiv Sena Leader) who was elected as Councillor of Solapur Municipal Corporation in 2017 by 4955 votes on the ground that Magar had more than two children one of which was born after September 1, 2001 and was thus disqualified from contesting the election under Section 10(1)(i) of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (“Act”). This is because the said provision disqualifies a person from being elected and from being a councillor who has more than two children. Mahanta had also contended that Ramdas at the time of filing nomination to the Returning Officer furnished information which was false to her knowledge.

Resisting the election petition, Ramdas denied having three children and contended that the third child born on 29 August 2004 was the daughter of Dattatray Magar and Sunita Magar and not the petitioner.

“It was purely out of inadvertence that in the intimation issued from the hospital on the birth of Poonam, the name of her parents was shown as Anita Magar and Ramdas Magar where in fact Poonam was daughter born to Dattatray Magar and Sunita Magar. It is submitted that the necessary correction was carried out in the Birth Certificate No.0047/791 on 7 January 2012, as per order passed by the Registrar, under the Registration of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969 (Act of 1969),” Ramdas had contended.

The High Court after considering the overall circumstances upheld the Trial Court’s order and observed that the Trial Court was right in refusing to accept the contention that Poonam was the daughter of Sunita and Dattatray Magar.

“There is sufficient evidence on record to show that she was the daughter born to the petitioner and her husband,” the High Court said.

Case Title: Anita Ramdas Magar v. Sou Bhagyalaxmi Prakash Mahanta & Ors| SLP(C) 8631|2021