Madhya Pradesh HC Imposes Cost Of ₹50K On Khandwa BJP MLA Kanchan Tanve For Attempting To Delay Proceedings Under RP Act
|The Madhya Pradesh High Court imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on Khandwa BJP MLA Kanchan Tanve for an attempt to delay the proceedings of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951.
The Court emphasised that the MLA went on to make allegations against the Court to achieve the 'ill-designed goal'.
The Court was hearing an application for modification of the order by which the Court proceeded ex parte against respondent no.1 BJP MLA Kanchan Tanve.
The bench of Justice G.S. Ahluwalia observed, “this cost has been imposed on two ground i.e. (i) an attempt has been made by respondent No.1 to delay the proceedings in spite of statutory provision of Section 86(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and (ii) in order to achieve the ill-designed goal respondent No.1 has gone to the extent of making allegation against the Court that although the acknowledgment of receipt of notice was received by the Registry on 08.05.2024, but still this Court had treated respondent No.1 as served on 06.05.2024.”
Advocate Arvind Shrivastava appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Anvesh Shrivastava appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
In the present case, the MLA Kanchan Tanve received the notice which was treated as served on the same date. However,she argued that she received the acknowledgement of notice two days after it was due for hearing. She argued that despite that the Court proceeded ex-parte on the next date due to her failure to appear. An office note confirmed that notices were served according to the Indian Post website, with the service report included. She contended that the notice was received by an employee, not herself, and claimed her non-appearance on subsequent hearing was due to polling for the Lok Sabha election in Khandwa.
The Court observed that under Section 86(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the trial of an election petition should proceed daily until concluded unless the High Court finds it necessary to adjourn the trial beyond the next day for recorded reasons.
The Court observed, “the whole attempt of respondent No.1 appears to frustrate the statutory provisions of Section 86(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and for making an attempt to achieve the said ill-designed goal, respondent No.1 has gone to the extent of making allegation against the Court that although acknowledgment of receipt of notice was received by the Registry on 08.05.2024, but still respondent No.1 was treated to be served on 06.05.2024.”
The Court noted that the MLA miserably failed in pointing out sufficient cause for setting aside ex-parte proceedings.
However, taking into consideration that Petitioner himself has applied for amendment of the election petition the Court thought it appropriate to allow the present application.
Accordingly, the Court said that ex-parte proceedings drawn against the MLA are recalled subject to payment of the cost of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited by her.
The Court listed the matter for further hearing.
Cause Title: Kundan Malviya v. Kanchan Tanve