Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition challenging BJP MLA Rajendra Gavit’s election from the Palghar constituency in the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly polls, rejecting claims that his nomination form was defective due to the mention of his second wife.
The court noted that Gavit belongs to the Bhil tribal community, which follows customs that permit polygamy. The court held that Gavit had made a “true and honest” disclosure of both his spouses in the election affidavit, including their PAN details and the status of their income tax returns.
“The respondent (Gavit) has made true and honest disclosure about details of PAN and status of filing of Income Tax Returns of both his spouses in the form,” Justice Sandeep Marne said on Monday.
The HC disposed of the petition filed by social activist Sudhir Jain, a voter from Palghar, who sought to declare Gavit’s election null and void. Jain contended that the inclusion of Rupali Gavit’s name as Gavit’s wife rendered the affidavit false, claiming the second marriage was invalid under the Hindu Marriage Act.
However, the court observed that Gavit’s tribal status allows such a marriage and pointed out that there was no provision under the election rules barring voluntary disclosures of this nature. It stated that candidates from communities or religions that permit polygamy should not be barred from contesting elections on this ground.
“There may be cases where a candidate belonging to a particular religion, in which polygamy is permitted, has contracted multiple marriages,” the court said, adding: “Mere addition of a column to make a true and honest disclosure of information would not attract a ground for challenging the election.”
The court also clarified that the act of voluntarily adding a column to disclose such information does not make the nomination form defective.
“The act of the candidate of adding a column in the form to make true and honest disclosure of information would neither render the nomination form defective nor would amount to violation of provisions of the Election Rules,” the court said.
It further held that there was no need to delve into the validity of the second marriage at this stage.
