The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea filed by poll strategist-turned-politician Prashant Kishore’s party, Jan Suraaj, challenging the outcome of the Bihar Assembly elections held in November last year. The bench advised the party to seek appropriate relief before the Bihar High Court.
The petition sought to have the 2025 Bihar election declared null and void, alleging violations of the Model Code of Conduct by the ruling Janata Dal (United)–Bharatiya Janata Party alliance. Jan Suraaj had contested 238 seats in the election but failed to secure any.
A bench led by Justice Surya Kant expressed strong reservations about the maintainability of the plea before the apex court. During the hearing, the court questioned the party’s move to directly approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. Justice Surya Kant remarked, “How many votes did your party get? The people rejected you, and you use this judicial platform to gain publicity?”
Advocate Jomalaya Bagchi also raised concerns over the arguments presented by the petitioner, stating, “How can you say this? You will also do the same when you come to power.”
The court subsequently directed the party to pursue its remedies before the Bihar High Court. “What is the logic of not going to the High Court? It is not a pan-India issue. There is a High Court in the state…. Avail that remedy,” the bench observed.
In its petition, Jan Suraaj had objected to the disbursal of ₹10,000 to one woman per family during the enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct, arguing that such measures compromised the integrity of a free and fair election. The party alleged that benefits were extended to an estimated 25–35 lakh women voters and termed the move a “corrupt practice” by the ruling alliance.
Senior Advocate CU Singh, appearing for the party, contended that the matter extended beyond allegations of corrupt practices to broader concerns over the alleged disturbance of the Model Code of Conduct across the state. “I am not on corrupt practice alone…also on Model Code of Conduct being disturbed across the state. These are subject to judicial review,” he submitted.
The Supreme Court, however, emphasised that claims of corrupt practices must demonstrate a direct electoral benefit to specific candidates. “It has to be shown in election that particular candidate has been benefited …….and that amounts to a corrupt practice,” the bench stated.
