Maharashtra Assembly Polls 2024 | “Farcical Claims Out Of Desperation”: Bombay HC Junks Plea Claiming Bogus Voters & EVM Hacking
On June 25 The Bombay High Court dismissed a petition alleging fake voters in the 2024 Maharashtra assembly polls, by saying it was nothing but “farcical claims made out of desperation”.
Thank you for reading this post, don’t forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: On 25th June 2025, the Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition under Article 226 challenging the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly Elections. The petitioner, alleged irregularities in votes cast after 6 PM, claiming around 76 lakh such votes lacked proper documentation.
Seeking 13 broad reliefs including the annulment of results, withdrawal of certificates, and reversion to paper ballots, the Court found the the petition speculative and legally flawed.
Background and Facts
The petitioner, Mr. Chetan Chandrakant Ahire, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court challenging the validity of the 2024 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly elections, which were held on 20 November 2024, with results declares on 24 November 2024.
The petitioner claimed that 6.80%, i.e., approx 76 lakh votes were cast after the official polling closure time, 6 PM and there is no data available with the ECI regarding these votes.
The petitioner relied on an RTI filed by Mr. Venkatesh Nayak, which stated that ECI had no record of pre-numbered slips issued to voters after 6 PM.
Petitioner relied on Clause 13.47 of the Handbook for Presiding Officers 2023, which mandates issuing slips to voters in queue at 6 PM.
Petitioner is a voter from Mumbai Vikhroli constituency and did not contest in the elections. He files the writ without making any prior representation or seeking information himself.
Issues before the Court
Whether a voter could bypass the statutory remedy of filing an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, by invoking writ jurisdiction?
Whether the petitioner had locus standi to challenge the entire Maharashtra Assembly election being only a voter from one constituency?
Whether the absence of token/slip data for voters in queue after 6 PM invalidates the election process?
Whether the petitioner could seek a writ of mandmus without first making a demand for justice to the Election Commission?
Whether the petitioner could be sustained based on RTI replies and newspaper articles without factual varification or direct grievances?
Judgment and Observation of the Court
A Bench comprising Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Arif Doctor declined to consider the writ petition. The bench said that the petitioner has failed to provide authentic information regarding his allegation and claim.
the Court said,
“We wonder as to how the petitioner can have a locus standi to seek such wide, sweeping and drastic reliefs to question the entire elections of the State Legislative Assembly. It is a relief, too far fetched, that too on the basis of no cause of action as the facts clearly demonstrate.”
The court mentioned
“As a requirement of such constitutional provision the RP Act, 1951 in Part VI makes adequate provisions for filing of election petitions before the High Court, to challenge the elections. Such petition is maintainable at the behest of a voter or a contesting candidate. These provisions constitute a Code by itself and cannot be by-passed in questioning the solemnity of the elections as conducted by the ECI within the constitutional set-up.”
Further said,
“The petitioner cannot be called to be a person aggrieved to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 so as to maintain the prayers as raised in the petition in blanketly assailing of the State Assembly elections, that too without impleading the successful candidates whose elections are being challenged. This is quite preposterous.”
As there was not any authentic information, except reply to RTI, the Court said,
“The said reply to the RTI application would not support the petitioner’s contention of elections to all the constituencies in the State of Maharashtra can at all be illegal. In fact on the face of it, such case of the petitioner appears to be quite absurd to say the least.”
In the context of the electronic voting machines (EVM) and a need to discard such system of voting to be replaced by a traditional method of voting by ballot papers, which was plea of the petitioner, the Court relied with the observation of the Supreme Court in a recent decision, in case of Association for Democratic Reforms vs. Election Commission of India & Anr.
The Court also refer to the supplementing judgment of Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, wherin the Lordship observed that,
“Electronic voting is not something which is prevalent only in India as multiple countries use electronic voting in varying degrees, in their national elections. It was also observed that use of EVMs in election in India is not without its checks and balances.”
The Court also stated,
“We have no manner of doubt that this writ petition needs to be summarily rejected. It is accordingly rejected. The hearing of this petition has practically taken the whole day leaving aside our urgent cause list, and for such reason the petition would certainly warrant dismissal with cost, however, we refrain from doing so.”
READ JUDGMENT:
Case Title: Chetan Chandrakant Ahire v. Union of India Through Department of Legal and Others WP/3101/2025 & Reg. No. :- WP/1402/2025
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Election Commission of India
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Maharashtra Assembly Election
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
