The Bombay High Court has thrown out an election petition that challenged the 2024 victory of Sunil Dnyandev Kamble from the 214 Pune Cantonment Assembly seat. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh ruled that the petition, filed by defeated candidate Ramesh Anandrao Bagwe, failed to disclose a proper cause of action and was dismissed at the threshold itself, without going to trial.
Background of the Case
Kamble had won the Pune Cantonment seat with 76,032 votes, while Bagwe, the runner-up, secured 65,712 votes. Unhappy with the result, Bagwe approached the High Court seeking to have the election declared void.
His petition rested on a few grounds. First, that the Election Commission never issued a formal notification under Section 61A of the Representation of the People Act before using EVMs, making the polling process invalid. Second, that the EVM-VVPAT machines did not carry properly engraved serial numbers and were not sealed by the Returning Officer himself, in violation of Rule 49B of the Conduct of Election Rules.
Third, that authorities gave him vague or no replies when he sought poll-related information under the RTI Act, which he claimed amounted to a "corrupt practice" under Section 123(7). He also pointed to a jump in voter numbers, from 2,92,889 to 2,95,382, between the initial and final voter lists, alleging that nearly 2,943 voters were added after nominations closed.
Kamble, in turn, moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, asking the Court to reject the petition outright for not meeting the strict pleading standards under Section 83 of the RP Act.
Court's Observations
The Court leaned heavily on an earlier ruling in Datta Rangnath Bahirat vs Sidharth Shirole, involving the same 2024 election but a neighbouring constituency, where identical arguments had already failed. The bench observed that Section 61A does not require any notification at all — only that the Election Commission specify that voting will happen through EVMs, and a press note is sufficient for that purpose.
On the EVM tampering claims, the judge found the pleadings vague and unsupported. As the order noted, there were "no particulars stated as to the manner in which the polling personnel were ill equipped," or which specific machines had missing serial numbers.
Regarding the RTI-based corrupt practice claim, the Court pointed out that Bagwe's own information requests were made after the results were declared on November 23, 2024 - meaning they could not possibly have influenced the poll outcome.
On the voter list discrepancy, the bench said a mere increase in numbers was not enough. The petition needed to show how the added voters actually cast votes improperly in Kamble's favour, which it did not.
Decision
Justice Deshmukh allowed Kamble's application and rejected the election petition under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, holding that it lacked the material facts and particulars mandatorily required to sustain a challenge under Section 100 of the RP Act.
The Election Petition stands dismissed.
Case Details
Case Title: Ramesh Anandrao Bagwe v. Sunil Dnyandev Kamble & Ors.
Case Number: Application (L) No. 11620 of 2026 in Election Petition No. 32 of 2025
Judge: Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh
Decision Date: August 12, 2026
 Act-300x169.webp)
