Supreme Court issues notice to Priyank Kharge on plea over 2023 Karnataka assembly polls

The appellant alleged that during the election campaign, Kharge and his agents circulated pamphlets styled as “Congress Guarantees,” purporting to set out promises of direct monetary transfers and other targeted benefits to voters.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to Karnataka IT Minister Priyank Kharge on a plea challenging his election from Chittapur (SC) constituency in the 2023 Karnataka Legislative Assembly Elections.

A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma sought a response from the Congress leader on a petition filed by Ashwathram, a registered elector from Chittapur challenging the Karnataka High Court's order of June 25, 2025.

The appellant led by advocate Vishwaditya Sharma specifically alleged that during the election campaign, Kharge and his agents circulated pamphlets styled as “Congress Guarantees,” purporting to set out promises of direct monetary transfers and other targeted benefits to voters.

The plea contended these pamphlets were not the official manifesto of the Indian National Congress, a registered political party under Section 29A of the RPA, but documents issued in the name of the Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee.

"The said pamphlets bore none of the statutory disclosures of printer and publisher as required under Section 127A of the RPA and were never filed with the Election Commission. They were distributed door-to-door and at public meetings with the active participation and consent of the respondent. The promises contained in these pamphlets constituted inducements in the nature of bribery within the meaning of Section 123(1) RPA and materially affected the result of the election,'' it claimed.

Senior advocate Anand Sanjay M Nuli appeared on behalf of Kharge. He accepted the notice and agreed to file a written response.

The petitioner also alleged improper acceptance of Kharge’s nomination on the basis of a caste certificate not issued in the prescribed format, and misrepresentation of his educational qualifications.

"These acts and defects cumulatively vitiated the election and rendered the respondent’s return liable to be declared void under Sections 100(1)(b) and 100(1)(d) of the RPA,'' he contended.

The High Court summarily rejected his petition at the threshold, holding, promises in the pamphlets cannot constitute corrupt practices in view of SC judgment in S Subramaniam Balaji Vs State of Tamil Nadu, acceptance of a defective caste certificate was immaterial to nomination; and allegations relating to filing of criminal cases and education were inconsequential.

The plea, however, contended the HC's order suffered from manifest errors, including Balaji was factually distinguishable, as that judgment dealt with welfare schemes post-election, and in any event its correctness stood referred to a larger bench in Ashwini Upadhyay Vs Union of India case.

"The High Court failed to appreciate that Section 123 RPA expressly extends bribery to acts of “any other person” and that a political party, being an association of persons, cannot be insulated from scrutiny when its material is used in the candidate’s campaign. Finally, grave constitutional implications arise, insulating candidates from accountability for direct inducements undermines the guarantee of free and fair elections, a basic feature of the Constitution,'' the plea said.