Court dismisses case against ex-minister Dhananjay Munde over concealment of info in nomination papers

A complaint filed against former state minister and NCP leader Dhananjay Munde alleging concealment of information in his nomination papers for the state Assembly elections has been dismissed by a court in Beed. The complainant in the case was Karuna Munde, who claims to be Munde’s first wife, and had alleged that this information was not included in the nomination papers and thus there were violations under the Representation of People Act.

The sections of the Act cited in the complaint require concealment of information with an intent to win an election. The court held that Munde has not concealed information with an intent to win an election and hence has not violated the Act.

“.. the accused (Munde) argued that he was elected in 2013 as a Member of the Maharashtra Legislative Council. He submitted an affidavit stating that his wife (is) Mrs Rajshri Munde, and he had mentioned this in all affidavits filed for the elections in 2019 and 2024. Considering this, it appears that there is no impact on his election victory due to the alleged concealment of facts as claimed by the complainant. Therefore, non-disclosure of such fact does not seem to be with the intent to be elected in an election,” Judicial Magistrate Dipak Borde said. The magistrate said that there are no sufficient grounds to proceed against Munde. The politician had contested from Parli in 2024 and won.

Munde, opposing the complaint, had said that he and Karuna were in a consensual relationship, which had resulted in two children. As the politician had consented to give them his name, their names are mentioned in the nomination papers as his children. It was submitted that the complainant was aware that he was married but had consented to be in a relationship with him which ended in 2020.

The court also noted that the complainant had claimed that they married each other in 1996 but at the time of verification during the proceedings, she said that her marriage date was in 1998.

“This reveals a discrepancy between the marriage date in the complaint and the verification,” the court said. The court also said that she has not submitted any documents to prove their marriage and she can pursue this issue before the appropriate court.