SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, June 10: A 23-year-old Supreme Court judgment that upheld former Jharkhand Chief Minister Babulal Marandi’s election despite a discrepancy in his name became the decisive legal precedent that helped NDA-backed independent candidate Parimal Nathwani overcome objections to his Rajya Sabha nomination on Wednesday.
After an intense scrutiny process marked by legal arguments and political protests, Returning Officer Ranjeet Kumar held Nathwani’s nomination papers to be valid, clearing the way for his candidature in the June 18 Rajya Sabha elections from Jharkhand.
The NDA, particularly the BJP, has thrown its weight behind Nathwani, who entered the contest as an independent candidate. He is up against Baijnath Ram, the candidate of the ruling Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM)-led alliance, and Pranav Jha, the Congress nominee.
Name Discrepancy at the Centre of Dispute
The principal objection against Nathwani’s nomination related to the manner in which his name appeared in different documents. While he filed his nomination as “Parimal Nathwani,” the electoral roll records his name as “Nathwani Parimal.”
Appearing for Nathwani, advocates Prashant Pallav and Kumar Harsh argued that the variation was purely technical and did not affect the candidate’s identity in any manner. They relied on the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in Harikrishna Lal vs Babulal Marandi, where the court held that minor clerical, technical or printing errors that do not create confusion about a candidate’s identity cannot be treated as defects of a substantial character.
In the Marandi case, the electoral roll recorded the former chief minister’s name as “Babu Marandi”, while his nomination papers described him as “Babu Lal Marandi.” The Supreme Court ruled that the omission of the word “Lal” was an insignificant technical error because there was no doubt regarding the candidate’s identity.
Drawing a parallel with Nathwani’s case, the defence argued that a mere interchange of surname and first name could not justify rejection of a nomination, especially when the identity of the candidate was undisputed and the discrepancy would have no impact on the electoral outcome.
Congress Raises Multiple Objections
The Congress objected not only to the name discrepancy but also alleged deficiencies in Nathwani’s disclosures in Form 26, the mandatory election affidavit filed by candidates.
According to Congress leaders, Nathwani failed to mention details regarding the companies in which he serves as a director and did not provide complete personal and financial information in the affidavit. The party further alleged that certain asset-related disclosures were either incomplete or concealed.
The objections triggered a political showdown outside the Jharkhand Assembly, where Congress ministers, MLAs and leaders staged a sit-in demanding cancellation of Nathwani’s nomination.
Salman Khurshid Flown In, Alleges Process Was “Pre-Fixed”
In a sign of how seriously the Congress viewed the matter, the party rushed senior advocate and former Union minister Salman Khurshid from Delhi to argue its case.
However, by the time Khurshid reached the Assembly, the hearing had already concluded.
Emerging from the Returning Officer’s office, Khurshid launched a sharp attack on the process, alleging that the outcome had been predetermined.
“Everything here was pre-decided. I came from Delhi to argue the case, but the matter was closed before I could even arrive,” he told reporters.
Khurshid questioned how a fresh affidavit could be accepted during scrutiny after objections had been raised regarding the discrepancy between “Parimal Nathwani” and “Nathwani Parimal.”
He also alleged that Nathwani had concealed details relating to movable and immovable assets and other financial particulars in his election affidavit. The Congress maintained that it would examine the Returning Officer’s order and consider further legal options after obtaining a copy of the decision.
Babulal Marandi Steps In
As tensions escalated, BJP leaders accused the Congress of attempting to obstruct the scrutiny process. Leader of Opposition Babulal Marandi, whose own Supreme Court victory became the foundation of Nathwani’s legal defence, reached the Assembly and said the Congress should not interfere with the constitutional duties of the Returning Officer.
The BJP also warned against attempts to disrupt the proceedings through political pressure.
Rajya Sabha Arithmetic
The battle over Nathwani’s nomination assumes significance because of the delicate numbers involved in the election for two Rajya Sabha seats from Jharkhand.
The ruling alliance has fielded Baijnath Ram as its official candidate, while the Congress has nominated Pranav Jha. The BJP-led NDA has backed Nathwani as an independent candidate.
With the NDA having around 24 MLAs supporting Nathwani, his candidature is viewed as a serious challenge in the contest. The outcome will depend on cross-voting, alliance discipline and the final arithmetic in the 81-member Assembly.
For the NDA, therefore, ensuring that Nathwani remained in the race was critical. Wednesday’s decision by the Returning Officer removed the immediate legal obstacle and kept alive the alliance’s strategy for the Rajya Sabha polls.
The episode also demonstrated the continuing relevance of the Supreme Court’s 2003 Babulal Marandi ruling, which remains an important precedent for election authorities dealing with technical discrepancies in nomination papers.