Non-Disclosure of Conviction in Election Affidavit Leads to Disqualification

❓ Question

If you were convicted for a criminal offence but got acquitted later, do you still need to disclose that conviction in your election nomination form?

✅ Answer

Yes, absolutely.

The Supreme Court has established that:

All convictions must be disclosed in election nomination affidavits, regardless of whether they were later set aside
Candidate eligibility is determined as of nomination date - subsequent acquittal doesn't cure the defect
Non-disclosure violates voters' right to information under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution
Even non-serious offences require disclosure if conviction involved imprisonment of one year or more

The court upheld the disqualification of the elected councillor who failed to disclose her Section 138 conviction.

⚖️ Understanding the Legal Principles

🔹 Voters' Right to Complete Information

Voters have fundamental right to know candidates' criminal antecedents
Right flows from Article 19(1)(a) - freedom of speech and expression
Includes right to receive information about candidates
Essential for informed voting in democracy
Non-disclosure deprives voters of making informed choice

🔹 Eligibility Determined at Nomination Date

Candidate qualification judged as on nomination submission date
Subsequent events like acquittal don't change nomination status
Conviction in force at nomination date must be disclosed
Later developments irrelevant for nomination validity
Critical distinction between nomination date and subsequent events

🔹 Mandatory Disclosure Requirements

Rule 24-A of MP Municipal Election Rules mandates conviction disclosure
Includes all convictions, not just serious offences
Particularly convictions with imprisonment of 1+ years
Affidavit verification must be complete and truthful
False affidavit leads to election disqualification

🔹 No Distinction Based on Offence Nature

Disclosure required regardless of moral turpitude
Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act conviction must be disclosed
Court cannot create exceptions not in law
Statutory requirements must be strictly followed
No judicial discretion to waive disclosure requirements

📜 Case Timeline & Key Events

Aug 07, 2018

Original Conviction: Petitioner convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, sentenced to 1 year imprisonment and compensation

Sep 09, 2022

Nomination Filed: Petitioner files nomination for Councillor election but doesn't disclose her 2018 conviction in affidavit

Oct 04, 2022

Election Won: Petitioner elected as Councillor from Ward No.5, Nagar Parishad, Bhikangaon

Dec 30, 2022

Subsequent Acquittal: Petitioner's conviction set aside in appeal - but this happened after election

Feb 17, 2025

Trial Court Decision: Election declared null and void for non-disclosure of conviction

High Court Appeal

Revision Dismissed: High Court upholds trial court decision, confirms disqualification

Nov 06, 2025

Supreme Court Ruling: Supreme Court dismisses Special Leave Petition, upholds disqualification

🧭 Your Action Plan: Election Nomination Compliance

📝 If You're Planning to Contest Elections

✅ Step 1: Complete Criminal Background Check

Check all past criminal cases against you
Include cases where you were acquitted later
Verify current status of each case
Document convictions even if appealed
Don't rely on memory - get official records

✅ Step 2: Full Disclosure in Affidavit

Disclose ALL convictions in nomination affidavit
Include cases under appeal or later acquitted
Provide complete details as required by form
Don't make subjective judgments about seriousness
When in doubt, disclose rather than conceal

✅ Step 3: Verify Affidavit Accuracy

Double-check all information before submission
Ensure verification statement is completely true
Keep copies of all submitted documents
Consult legal expert if unsure about requirements
Remember: Better over-disclosure than non-disclosure

⚖️ If You're a Voter or Opponent Candidate

Situation	Your Rights	Required Action
Candidate Didn't Disclose Conviction	Right to challenge election under Section 22 of MP Municipalities Act	File election petition with evidence of non-disclosure
Incomplete Information in Affidavit	Right to accurate information about candidates	File counter-affidavit highlighting omissions
False Information Provided	Right to seek disqualification for false affidavit	Gather evidence and file appropriate legal challenge
Returning Officer Accepted Defective Nomination	Right to challenge improper acceptance	File election petition citing improper nomination acceptance
Candidate Claims Subsequent Acquittal	Right to argue eligibility determined at nomination date	Cite this Supreme Court judgment in your arguments

📘 Key Legal Terms Explained

Rule 24-A of MP Municipal Election Rules

Legal provision requiring election candidates to furnish information about criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities and educational qualifications through sworn affidavit.

Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act

Criminal provision dealing with dishonour of cheques due to insufficient funds, punishable with imprisonment up to 2 years or fine.

Article 19(1)(a) Constitution

Fundamental right guaranteeing freedom of speech and expression, interpreted by courts to include voters' right to information about candidates.

Election Petition

Legal challenge to the validity of an election result, filed by any candidate or voter alleging irregularities or violations of election laws.

🚨 What to Avoid in Election Nominations

❌ Don't Assume Minor Offences Don't Matter

Don't think Section 138 conviction is too minor to disclose
Avoid making subjective judgments about offence seriousness
Don't rely on subsequent acquittal to justify non-disclosure
Avoid incomplete or selective disclosure in affidavit

❌ Don't Ignore Technical Compliance

Don't treat affidavit as mere formality - it's legally binding
Avoid casual verification without proper checking
Don't assume voters won't check or challenge
Avoid thinking "everyone does it" - courts take strict view

💡 Core Takeaway from the Supreme Court

"When a candidate fails to disclose a previous conviction in the election affidavit, it creates an impediment in the free exercise of electoral right by a voter. A voter is thus deprived of making an informed and advised choice. The eligibility of a candidate is required to be determined as on the date of submission of the nomination form, and subsequent acquittal does not cure the defect of non-disclosure."

This judgment reinforces the fundamental principle of transparency in elections. The court emphasized that democracy cannot survive without free and fair elections with informed voters. The right to information about candidates' criminal antecedents is not just a statutory requirement but a fundamental right of every voter under the Constitution.

📞 When to Seek Professional Help

👨‍⚖️ Election Lawyer Essential For

Preparing election nomination forms and affidavits
Advising on disclosure requirements for criminal cases
Representation in election petition proceedings
Challenging or defending election results
Navigating complex election law provisions

📝 You Can Handle With Support

Basic understanding of nomination requirements
Gathering criminal record information
Initial assessment of disclosure obligations
Understanding legal principles from this judgment
Monitoring election law compliance

⚠️ DISCLAIMER

This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific legal guidance. The information provided is based on judicial interpretation and may be subject to changes in law.

🌿 LegalEcoSys Mission

Making Supreme Court judgments accessible and actionable for every Indian citizen navigating legal challenges.

This analysis decodes a complex election law judgment to help citizens and potential candidates understand their rights and obligations regarding election nomination disclosures and the critical importance of transparency in democratic processes.