The Apogee
The Apogee
  • Home
  • From Courts
  • Global
  • Technology
  • Business
  • Law
  • Judgements
    • High Court
    • Supreme Court
  • Achievers
  • Video
  • More
    • Interviews
    • Opinion/Features
    • Research
    • Science
    • Environs
    • Health
  • test-series
  1. Home
  2. From Courts
  3. Candidate need not disclose every movable asset owned by him or his dependents: SC
 Candidate need not disclose every movable asset owned by him or his dependents: SC
CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 100
From Courts Trending

Candidate need not disclose every movable asset owned by him or his dependents: SC

by Newsdesk April 9, 2024

AA

New Delhi, April 9 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that a candidate need not disclose each and every movable asset owned by him or his dependents unless they constitute high-value assets having a substantial impact on his candidature.

The above observation was made by a bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sanjay Kumar as it upheld the 2019 election of the Independent MLA Karikho Kri from the Tezu Assembly constituency in Arunachal Pradesh.

Earlier, the Gauhati High Court had declared the election of Karikho Kri as null and void on the election petition filed by Congress candidate Nuney Tayang accusing the former of making false declarations in his election nomination paper.

Tayang contended that Kri did not disclose details of vehicles owned by him and his family and a plot of land owned by his mother. Further, he claimed that Kri did not disclose that he was in occupation of a government accommodation and did not submit ‘No Dues Certificates’ towards the rent, electricity charges, water charges and telephone charges.

In a detailed judgment passed in July last year, the Itanagar bench of the Gauhati High Court declared the election of the returned candidate as void to safeguard the purity of the election process and to see that people do not get elected by flagrant breaches of the law.

Later, the top court in an interim direction stayed the conduct of fresh elections to the subject constituency. It had said, “The appellant should be entitled to all privileges as Member of the House and in the Committees, but the appellant shall not be entitled to cast his vote on the Floor of the House and in any of the Committees where he participates in the capacity as a Member of the Legislative Assembly.”

Previous post
Next post

Latest Post

From Courts

Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court quashes false rape and dowry case against would be husband

May 13, 2024
From Courts

SC asks Patanjali to place on record IMA chief’s interview terming apex court observations as ‘unfortunate’

April 30, 2024
From Courts

Delhi HC restrains Ashneer Grover from creating third party rights in BharatPe shares

April 30, 2024
Global

AstraZeneca admits Covishield jab raises TTS risk. Should you be worried?

April 30, 2024
Copyright © 2026 Qoxag. All Right Reserved.
Go to mobile version