Interpretation of Affidavit Disclosure Rules and Cognizance Under Wrong Section

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Chandrikaben Kishor Dafda v. State of Gujarat & Anr.

• Citation: 2026 INSC 665

• Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol

• Date of Judgment: July 1, 2026

• Area of Law: Criminal Law, Election Law, Representation of Peoples Act, Cognizance of Offences

Judgment in Brief

The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by remanding the matter to the Magistrate for fresh consideration. The appellant, a municipal councillor, challenged the issuance of process against her for allegedly filing a false affidavit disclosing property details during the 2015 municipal elections. The Court clarified the interpretation of the Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules, holding that candidates must disclose properties owned by their spouse as well. However, the Court found that the Magistrate had taken cognizance only under Section 125A of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (RPA), which was legally incorrect as the RPA does not apply to municipal elections. The Court held that taking cognizance under a wrong section is a curable defect under Section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as long as the Court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of the actual offences. The Magistrate was directed to take fresh cognizance under the appropriate provisions of law.

Relevant Facts

• The appellant, a candidate for the position of Councillor in the 2015 Municipal elections in Gujarat, filed an affidavit disclosing her assets and those of her spouse as required under the Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules.

• A complaint was filed alleging that the appellant had not disclosed the true extent of landed property owned by herself and her spouse, including properties owned solely by her husband.

• After some investigation, the complainant filed a privat

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.