SC admits turncoat's appeal against Manipur HC order; Wangkhei MLA restrained from voting

In a key development, the Supreme Court admitted the appeal of BJP's Okram Henry Singh against the Manipur HC's order declaring his election to the Assembly in 2017 as null and void. Based on the HC's verdict, his opponent Yumkham Erabot Singh was sworn in as an MLA on April 21. While the matter has been listed for final disposal on July 27, the apex court bench comprising Justices UU Lalit, Indira Banerjee and KM Joseph issued some interim reliefs in the meantime.

For instance, Yumkham Erabot Singh will be entitled to represent the electorate in the Assembly and participate in debates. However, he cannot cast any vote on the floor of the Assembly or in any committee of the House. Moreover, he cannot draw any monetary benefits in respect of the office of MLA. He can file an affidavit in response within a period of 4 weeks and a rejoinder can be filed within three weeks thereafter. 

The Manipur HC order

Former Manipur CM Okram Ibobi Singh's nephew Okram Henry Singh switched over to BJP from Congress in August 2020. He was appointed as a Cabinet Minister for Municipal Administration, Housing and Urban Development on September 24. However, he ceased to be a Minister owing to his inability to get elected to the Assembly within 6 months.

In this time period, the Election Commission had not conducted the by-poll. The Manipur HC's order dated April 15 came on an election petition filed by BJP leader Yumkham Erabot Singh who accused Okram Henry Singh of filing an incomplete affidavit during the submission of nomination papers for the Wangkhei seat. Contesting on a Congress ticket back then, Okram Henry Singh had defeated his opponent Yumkham Erabot Singh by a margin of 4,336 votes. 

In the judgment, the court held that Okram Henry Singh furnished incorrect educational qualifications and had failed to disclose the name of his spouse and dependents and a case pending against him. "... but for reasons best known to him, (he) failed to disclose the said information. Non-disclosure of the material information of the Respondent No. 1 (Henry) amounts to violation of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and rules thereof, and hence his election is fit to be declared as null and void," the HC stated.