Trial of election petitions
Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 deals with trial of election petitions. The High Court shall dismiss an election petition which does not comply with the provisions of section 81 or section 82 or section 117. The Act came into force on 17 Jul 1951.
1[(1) The High Court shall dismiss an election petition which does not comply with the provisions of section 81 or section 82 or section 117.
Explanation.—An order of the High Court dismissing an election petition under this sub-section shall be deemed to be an order made under clause (a) of section 98.
(2) As soon as may be after an election petition has been presented to the High Court, it shall be referred to the Judge or one of the Judges who has or have been assigned by the Chief Justice for the trial of election petitions under sub-section (2) of section 80A.
(3) Where more election petitions than one are presented to the High Court in respect of the same election, all of them shall be referred for trial to the same Judge who may, in his discretion, try them separately or in one or more groups.
(4) Any candidate not already a respondent shall, upon application made by him to the High Court within fourteen days from the date of commencement of the trial and subject to any order as to security for costs which may be made by the High Court, be entitled to be joined as a respondent.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section and of section 97, the trial of a petition shall be deemed to commence on the date fixed for the respondents to appear before the High Court and answer the claim or claims made in the petition.
(5) The High Court may, upon such terms as to costs and otherwise as it may deem fit, allow the particulars of any corrupt practice alleged in the petition to be amended or amplified in such manner as may in its opinion be necessary for ensuring a fair and effective trial of the petition, but shall not allow any amendment of the petition which will have the effect of introducing particulars of a corrupt practice not previously alleged in the petition.
(6) The trial of an election petition shall, so far as is practicable consistently with the interests of justice in respect of the trial, be continued from day to day until its conclusion, unless the High Court finds the adjournment of the trial beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded.
(7) Every election petition shall be tried as expeditiously as possible and endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date on which the election petition is presented to the High Court for trial.
Section 86, 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.
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.
-
Ajay Arun Singh vs Sharadendu Tiwari
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In election petitions challenging elections on grounds of corrupt practices, the requirement of Section 83(1) proviso can be satisfied by a single composite affidavit that covers both the verification requirements under CPC Order VI Rule 15(4) and the corrupt practice allegations, provided such affidavit is filed with the petition on the date of presentation in substantial compliance with Form 25. The question whether an affidavit was filed with the petition on the date of presentation is a pure question of fact that must be directly and substantially in issue in the proceeding for the doctrine of res judicata to apply. The failure of the Registrar to affix his signature on an affidavit does not constitute proof that the affidavit was not filed with the petition, as the act or omission of the Court shall not prejudice the rights of any party. Substantial compliance with the prescribed format of the affidavit is sufficient; absolute compliance is not necessary.
On this section: Grounds for dismissal of election petition; non-compliance with procedural requirements not covered under this section
-
Ajay Arun Singh vs Sharadendu Tiwari
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where an election petition is filed challenging an election on grounds of corrupt practice, the requirements of verification under Order VI Rule 15(4) of CPC and the requirement of an affidavit in Form 25 under proviso to Section 83(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, can be satisfied by a single composite affidavit. Substantial compliance with statutory form requirements is sufficient; absolute compliance with prescribed format is not necessary. A defect in affidavit format is curable and does not render the election petition defective in limine. The absence of Registrar's signature on affidavit pages due to Registrar's omission does not create a rebuttable presumption that the affidavit was not filed with the original petition, as the court's act or omission shall not prejudice a party's rights. Questions of fact that were never in issue and not directly examined in earlier proceedings are not barred from being relitigated by principles of res judicata or estoppel. High Court Rules framed under Article 225 cannot override or curtail statutory provisions regarding jurisdiction of election petitions under Section 80A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
On this section: Non-compliance with Rules of High Court framed under Article 225 does not fall under Section 86, hence does not render order without jurisdiction.
-
Shyamdeo Pd. Singh vs Nawal Kishore Yadav
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Inclusion of persons in the electoral roll who are not qualified to be enrolled under Section 27 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 cannot constitute a ground for setting aside an election of a returned candidate under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, unless such persons are explicitly disqualified under Section 16 of the 1950 Act. A person validly enrolled in the electoral roll by authorized authorities is entitled to cast a vote and cannot be excluded from exercising voting rights on the ground that they did not satisfy eligibility requirements, as the electoral roll becomes final and conclusive as to qualification matters from the last date for nominations until completion of the election. The distinction between statutory disqualification (which bars voting even if enrolled) and lack of qualification (which may have required denial of enrollment but does not bar voting once enrolled) is fundamental to election law. Non-compliance with electoral roll preparation procedures, while subject to criticism and administrative correction, does not provide grounds for election petition challenge post-nomination deadline.
On this section: Provides for trial of election petitions
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 86
What have the courts held on Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act?
Ajay Arun Singh vs Sharadendu Tiwari (15 Mar 2016) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Grounds for dismissal of election petition; non-compliance with procedural requirements not covered under this section. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2000 to 2016.
How do I find court cases under Section 86 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 86, section 86 RP Act 1951, section 86 of the Representation of the People Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Ajay Arun Singh vs Sharadendu Tiwari (15 Mar 2016).
What should I read with Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 80A (High Court to try election petitions), section 81 (Presentation of petitions), section 82 (Parties to the petition), section 97 (Recrimination when seat claimed), and on 2 further provisions, so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it.
When did Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act come into force?
Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, cited as RP Act 1951 86, 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 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.