Supreme Court Restores Assam Election Petition, Clarifies Effect of Defective Form 25 Copy
New Delhi, 24 August 2026: The Supreme Court has restored an election petition challenging the result from the Karimganj Parliamentary Constituency in Assam, holding that the High Court should not have rejected the entire petition at the threshold over attestation defects.
Neutral citation: 2026 INSC 915
Case number: Civil Appeal No. 7474 of 2025
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Decision date: 24 August 2026
Why the petition had been rejected
The election petition arose from the 2024 Lok Sabha election for No. 7 Karimganj Parliamentary Constituency. Objections included different “attested to be true copy” and “certified to be true copy” stamps across the served copy, an alleged absence of notarisation on the Form 25 affidavit supporting corrupt-practice allegations, and alleged missing pages.
The High Court rejected the petition under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Supreme Court found no reason to disturb the High Court’s rejection of the missing-pages allegation, but disagreed with the treatment of the attestation issues.
Different true-copy stamps were sufficient
On Section 81(3), the Court held that no particular formula of attestation is prescribed. A petitioner’s signature accepting responsibility for the served copy as true is sufficient. The two rubber-stamp formulations conveyed the same meaning and did not justify rejection.
Form 25 defect does not automatically end the entire case
The Court directed the High Court to verify whether the original Form 25 on its record had been duly affirmed and attested. If it was, the election petition must proceed on the merits. If it was not, the corrupt-practice allegations cannot be pursued, but any other independently pleaded grounds must still be considered.
The judgment stresses that a defect under Section 83 does not itself trigger the mandatory dismissal mechanism in Section 86 for non-compliance with Sections 81, 82 or 117. It allowed the appeal and restored the election petition to the High Court’s file; it did not decide the underlying challenge to the election result.
Why the ruling matters
The decision supplies a structured approach to copy and affidavit defects in election litigation. It separates potentially curable or issue-specific defects from failures that require dismissal of the whole petition, while retaining strict scrutiny for corrupt-practice allegations.
Read the official Supreme Court judgment.
This report is for legal information only and does not constitute legal advice.