Telangana HC grants relief to BRS leader Harish Rao, dismisses election petition

Hyderabad: Telangana High Court has dismissed an election petition filed by Ghadagoni Chakradhar Goud of the BSP against senior BRS leader and MLA T Harish Rao.

In his petition, Chakradhar Goud had challenged Harish Rao’s victory from the Siddipet Assembly constituency in the 2023 Telangana Assembly elections.

In his judgment, Justice K Sarath said that the petitioner failed to substantiate his claims with adequate material facts and supporting documents, as required under Sections 33-A, 83(1)(a), and 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Allegations deemed vague and unsupported

Goud, who contested the election on a BSP ticket and secured only 16,610 votes against Harish Rao’s winning margin of 83,025 votes, alleged corrupt practices by the BRS leader. These included claims of suppression of criminal antecedents, misrepresentation of land details in election affidavits, and undue influence over polling officials.

However, the court held that the allegations were vague and unsupported. Justice Sharath emphasized that Goud did not furnish any documents such as FIRs, charge sheets, or court records to prove the alleged concealment of criminal cases or irregularities in election expenditure declarations.

No proof of land misrepresentation

One of Goud’s key contentions was that Harish Rao misrepresented agricultural land as non-agricultural. However, the judge clarified that the land details provided by Harish Rao in his election affidavit (Form-26) clearly specified the measurement in square yards and nowhere classified the land as agricultural. The court noted that Goud did not submit any documentary evidence to contradict this.

Claims on polling percentage increase unsubstantiated

Goud also alleged that Harish Rao influenced election officials, resulting in an unusual spike in polling percentage from 45 percent to 85 percent. Justice Sharath dismissed this argument as well, observing that the petitioner failed to specify which polling booths were affected or present any data or evidence to back the claim.

Petition rejected for lack of material facts

Upholding the legal requirement that an election petition must be precise and substantiated with clear particulars, Justice Sharath ruled that Goud’s petition did not meet the legal threshold. “In the absence of specific material facts and documentary proof, the election petition stands rejected,” the court concluded.