Shiakh Asif Shaikh Rashid @ Asif Shaikh Rasheed v. Mufti Mohammad Ismail Abdul Khalique

Arun Sankpal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ELECTION PETITION NO. 7 OF 2025 Shaikh Asif Shaikh Rashid Alias Asif Shaikh Rasheed

...Petitioner

Versus

Mufti Mohammad Ismail Abdul Khalique & Ors

...Respondents

Mr. S.S. Patwardhan, with Bhooshan Mandlik, for the Petitioner. Mr. Abhijit G Aher, i/b Suyash N. Khose, for Respondent No.1. Mr. M.M. Vashi, Senior Advocate, (through VC), i/b M/s M.P. Vashi & Associates, for Respondent No.5.

CORAM:

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATED :

19th AUGUST 2025 P.C.:

1.

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

In view of the pleadings, the following issues arise for determination:

ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Issues ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2025.08.20 15:15:04 +0530 Does the Petitioner prove that the Respondent No.1 has committed corrupt practices of undue influence as defined under the provisions of Section 123(2) read with the Section 100(1)(b) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951? Does the Petitioner prove that the Respondent No.1 has committed corrupt practices of undue influence as defined 1/4

under the provisions of Section 123(2) read with Section 100(1)(d)(ii) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951? Does the Petitioner prove that the Respondent No.1 has committed corrupt practices as defined under the provisions of Section 123(2) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951? Does the Petitioner prove that the Respondent No.1 has committed corrupt practices as defined under the provisions of Section 123(3A) the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, by promoting enmity between different classes of citizens of India on the basis of religion, caste, community and language? Does the Petitioner prove that the Respondent No.1 and his agents have committed corrupt practices as defined under the provisions of Section 123(4) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, by making imputations against Petitioner's personal character, which have prejudiced the prospects of Petitioner's election?

Does the Petitioner prove that the corrupt practices committed by the agents of the Respondent No.1 have materially affected the result of the election as contemplated under Section 100(1) (d)(ii) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951? Does the Petitioner prove that the improper reception of the votes of persons who are dead has materially affected the result of the election as contemplated under Section 100(1)(d)(iii) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951?

2/4

Does the Respondent No.1 prove that the Petition is not maintainable for non-compliance of the mandatory requirements under Section 83 of the Representation of Peoples Act 1951?

Does the Petitioner prove that the Election of the Respondent No.1 is liable to be set aside?

Does the Petitioner prove that he should be declared as lawfully elected candidate as provided under Section 84 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951?

What order ?

3.

The Petitioner shall, within two weeks, file (i) the evidence affidavit of the Petitioner; (ii) an affidavit of documents; and (iii) a compilation of documents duly indexed and paginated. Copies of each of these will be served on the Advocates for the Respondent on or before that date.

4.

The Respondent No. 5 shall, within two weeks, file (i) an affidavit of documents; and (ii) a compilation of documents duly indexed and paginated. Copies of each of these will be served on the Advocate for the Petitioner on or before that date.

3/4

5.

Discovery and inspection is to be completed and statements of admission and denial are to be exchanged within two weeks, thereafter. 6.

On the Petitioner complying with these directions, the matter will be taken up for marking of the Petitioner's documents and further directions on 16th September 2025, irrespective of the caption under which the matter appears.

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] 4/4