https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199585 A constitutional oath is valid where its essential substance is complied with, even if a minor linguistic inaccuracy appears in one expression. The Supreme Court's reasoning was that the candidate had been duly nominated and had declared faith and allegiance to the Constitution and an undertaking to uphold India's sovereignty and integrity; the impugned Gujarati expression did not displace those core elements. Because the surrounding circumstances showed no real misapprehension about the office contested, the oath was held to be in substantial compliance with Article 173 and the Third Schedule, and disqualification on that ground was rejected. en-us Mon, 04 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:05:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199585 A constitutional oath is valid where its essential substance is complied with, even if a minor linguistic inaccuracy appears in one expression. The Supreme Court's reasoning was that the candidate had been duly nominated and had declared faith and allegiance to the Constitution and an undertaking to uphold India's sovereignty and integrity; the impugned Gujarati expression did not displace those core elements. Because the surrounding circumstances showed no real misapprehension about the office contested, the oath was held to be in substantial compliance with Article 173 and the Third Schedule, and disqualification on that ground was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Nov 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199585