- Supreme Court refuses to entertain Jan Suraaj’s plea challenging Bihar election results
- Bench questions party’s motive after it won zero seats
- Court says matter should be taken to Bihar High Court
- Petition alleged violation of Model Code through cash benefits to women voters
GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 6th Feb: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by poll strategist-turned-politician Prashant Kishor’s party, Jan Suraaj, challenging the results of the Bihar Assembly election held in November last year.
The party, which contested 238 seats in its electoral debut but failed to win any, had sought to have the election declared null and void. It alleged that the ruling Janata Dal (United)-Bharatiya Janata Party alliance violated the Model Code of Conduct by distributing cash benefits to women voters.
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant declined to hear the plea and directed the party to approach the Bihar High Court instead.
“How many votes did your party get? The people rejected you and you use this judicial platform to gain publicity?” the Chief Justice remarked during the hearing.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi also questioned the argument, stating that similar practices could be adopted by any party once it came to power. The bench asked why the petitioners had not approached the High Court, noting that the issue was not of pan-India significance.
Allegations over cash benefits
In its petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, Jan Suraaj argued that the disbursal of ₹10,000 to one woman per family during the election period violated the Model Code and undermined the fairness of the polls.
The party claimed that benefits were extended to 25–35 lakh women voters and described the move as a “corrupt practice”.
However, the Supreme Court observed that to prove corrupt practices, it must be shown that a particular candidate directly benefited from such measures.
Freebies issue still under court’s consideration
The broader issue of poll promises and freebies is already being examined by the Supreme Court in a separate matter. The court has earlier noted that such promises could push states towards financial distress.
During Friday’s hearing, the bench said it would prefer to hear the issue from public-spirited petitioners rather than a political party that lost the election.
Jan Suraaj had earlier claimed that the cash transfers influenced voting patterns and contributed to the ruling alliance’s victory. However, the party ended the election with a vote share of less than four per cent and no seats in the Assembly.
