Right to information
Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 deals with right to information. [33. Presentation of nomination paper and requirements for a valid nomination.--(1) A candidate shall, apart from any information which he is required to furnish, under this Act or the rules made thereunder, in his nomination paper delivered under sub-section (1) of section 33, also furnish the info The Act came into force on 17 Jul 1951.
1[33. Presentation of nomination paper and requirements for a valid nomination.--(1) A candidate shall, apart from any information which he is required to furnish, under this Act or the rules made thereunder, in his nomination paper delivered under sub-section (1) of section 33, also furnish the information as to whether--
(i) he is accused of any offence punishable with imprisonment for two years or more in a pending case in which a charge has been framed by the court of competent jurisdiction;
(ii) he has been convicted of an offence [other than any offence referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), or covered in sub-section (3), of section 8] and sentenced to imprisonment for one year or more.
(2) The candidate or his proposer, as the case may be, shall, at the time of delivering to the returning officer the nomination paper under sub-section (1) of section 33, also deliver to him an affidavit sworn by the candidate in a prescribed form verifying the information specified in sub-section (1).
(3) The returning officer shall, as soon as may be after the furnishing of information to him under sub-section (1), display the aforesaid information by affixing a copy of the affidavit, delivered under sub-section (2), at a conspicuous place at his office for the information of the electors relating to a constituency for which the nomination paper is delivered.]
Section 33A, The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Act 43 of 1951).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Sri Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithibiraj Singh vs Shri Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a candidate's nomination is improperly accepted due to false declaration of educational qualification, and there are only two candidates contesting for a single seat, the election of the returned candidate must be declared void without requiring further proof that the result was materially affected by such improper acceptance. A false declaration relating to educational qualification constitutes a defect of substantial character warranting rejection of nomination, as voters have a fundamental right to accurate information about candidates' qualifications. The distinction between improper acceptance of a returned candidate's nomination versus other candidates' nominations is critical: when the returned candidate's nomination is improperly accepted, no pleading or proof of material effect is necessary because the returned candidate would not have been able to contest the election but for such improper acceptance.
On this section: Inserted by Act 72 of 2002; requires candidates to provide additional information including criminal antecedents
-
Resurgence India vs Election Commission of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The voter has elementary right to know full particulars of candidate representing him in Parliament/Assemblies as natural right flowing from concept of democracy and integral part of Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution. Filing of affidavit with blank particulars renders affidavit nugatory and defeats purpose of disclosure requirement. Returning Officer has duty to check whether information required is fully furnished at time of filing affidavit with nomination paper, and if candidate fails to fill blanks even after reminder, nomination paper is fit to be rejected. Para 73 of People's Union for Civil Liberties case does not bar rejection of nomination paper when affidavit is filed with blank particulars. Candidate must explicitly remark as NIL, Not Applicable, or Not known in columns and not leave particulars blank.
On this section: Mandates candidates to furnish information regarding criminal convictions, pending cases, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications in prescribed affidavit form. Court held this section implements voter's fundamental right to know.
-
Resurgence India vs Election Commission of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Returning Officers have the statutory power and constitutional duty to reject nomination papers accompanied by affidavits with blank particulars because: (1) citizens have a fundamental right to know candidates' criminal antecedents, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications under Article 19(1)(a); (2) filing affidavit with blank particulars renders it nugatory and defeats its purpose; (3) such blanks constitute defects of substantial character under Section 36(4) of the Representation of the People Act as they make verification of candidate qualifications impossible; (4) the PUCL judgment's restriction applies only to false information, not incomplete information; and (5) candidates must explicitly mark such fields as 'NIL', 'Not Applicable', or 'Not Known' rather than leaving them blank.
On this section: Section 33A mandates that every candidate must furnish information in a prescribed form via affidavit duly sworn before a Magistrate regarding criminal cases, convictions, assets, liabilities, and educational qualifications. The Court held that this provision's purpose is to effectuate citizens' right to know and that filing affidavit with blank particulars defeats this purpose.
-
Sri Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithibiraj Singh vs Shri Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the nomination of a returned candidate is found to have been improperly accepted due to a substantial defect such as false declaration of educational qualification, and there are only two candidates contesting the election, it is not necessary for the election petitioner to separately plead and prove that the result of the election was materially affected by such improper acceptance. The material effect on the result is an obvious conclusion from the circumstances, because the returned candidate would not have been able to contest the election at all if his nomination had been properly rejected. Additionally, false declaration regarding educational qualification constitutes a defect of substantial character warranting rejection of nomination under Section 36(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as voters have a fundamental right to accurate information about candidates' qualifications.
On this section: Inserted by Act 72 of 2002 requiring candidates to provide additional information including criminal antecedents; establishes duty to provide complete information
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 33A
What have the courts held on Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act?
Sri Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithibiraj Singh vs Shri Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh (28 Oct 2016) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Inserted by Act 72 of 2002; requires candidates to provide additional information including criminal antecedents. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2016.
How do I find court cases under Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: RP Act 1951 33A, section 33A RP Act 1951, section 33A of the Representation of the People Act. People searching for it also type section 33a of the representation of the people act 1951. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sri Mairembam Prithviraj @ Prithibiraj Singh vs Shri Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh (28 Oct 2016).
What should I read with Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 8 (Disqualification on conviction for certain offences), section 33 (Presentation of nomination paper and requirement for a valid nomination), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it.
When did Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act come into force?
Section 33A of the Representation of the People Act, cited as RP Act 1951 33A, came into force on 17 Jul 1951, having been enacted on 17 Jul 1951. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 123. Corrupt practices1710 words
- 33. Presentation of nomination paper and requirement for a valid nomination1149 words
- 8. Disqualification on conviction for certain offences898 words
- 75A. Declaration of assets and liabilities659 words
- 39. Nomination of candidates at other elections632 words
- 36. Scrutiny of nominations596 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.