2022 bypolls: Supreme Court sets aside HC's remarks made while rejecting AAP leader Durgesh Pathak's plea

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday set aside an observation of the Delhi High Court made at the time of rejecting AAP leader Durgesh Pathak's plea over his election in 2022 assembly bypolls.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh noted that Pathak contested the 2025 Delhi assembly election and lost.

One Rajan Tiwari challenged Pathak's election in the high court but his counsel said the election petition was now infructuous and sought to withdraw the plea.

The bench set aside the observation of the high court while dismissing Pathak plea under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the maintainability of the election petition against his election and held it wouldn't prove to be an impediment him in contesting future elections.

The top court had sought Tiwari's response in the matter on November 14 last year and stayed the proceedings on the election petition.

On November 4, last year, the top court asked Pathak to file an affidavit stating no FIR was registered against him except the one that was disclosed in the Form 26 while filing his nomination papers.

Pathak challenged the July 8 last year order of the high court in which it refused to dismiss Tiwari's petition.

Tiwari had challenged Pathak's election as an MLA from the Rajinder Nagar constituency in the bypolls held in June 2022, alleging that he indulged in corrupt practices.

Pathak defeated his nearest rival by a margin of 11,468 votes in the bypoll.

The high court dismissed Pathak's application seeking rejection of the election petition filed against him, saying there was no justification to do so at that stage.

Tiwari, who claimed to be a voter of Rajinder Nagar, challenged Pathak's election on the grounds of non-disclosure of criminal antecedents, holding an office of profit on the date of the scrutiny of his nomination, suppression of income-tax returns for financial year 2019-20 and disclosure of an incorrect valuation of shares in a company in the nomination form.

He therefore sought Pathak's election to be declared null and void.

In his application in the high court, the AAP leader claimed the petition failed to disclose a cause of action and that the allegation of non-disclosure of criminal antecedents was premised on the fact that he had failed to mention details pertaining to an FIR.

In the recently held assembly polls, Pathak lost to BJP Umang Bajaj by 1,231 votes from the same constituency.