Representation of the People Act, 1951 – ss. 83, 86 – Contents of the petition – Trial of election petition – Appellant elected in the General Elections to the State Legislative Assembly – Election petition by the respondent-contestant from the same seat, challenging the election of the appellant alleging that the appellant did not disclose her assets in her nomination papers and had indulged in corrupt practices in the election – Application u/Ord. VII r. 11 CPC read with s. 86 for rejection of the election petition by the appellant – Dismissed by the High Court holding that the election petition discloses a cause of action and that there is substantial compliance of the requirements provided under provisions of RPA and thus the election petition cannot be dismissed u/Ord. VII r. 11 application – Interference with:
Held: Not called for – Perusal of s. 83 shows that an election petition should, inter alia, contain a concise statement of material facts and particulars of any corrupt practices which is alleged against the returned candidate, etc. – Proviso to s. 83(1) requires that the election petition to be accompanied by an affidavit in prescribed form to support the allegations of corrupt practices – Election petition should not be rejected at the very threshold where there is a “substantial compliance” of the provisions – In the election petition, the respondent pleaded there was non- compliance with the requirement of furnishing true and correct information by the appellant – On a perusal of the petition as a whole, including the averments stated, it is clear that a cause of action has been disclosed by the respondent – Whether the appellant has concealed her investments and her income, and thus her nomination has been improperly accepted, is a triable issue – Also, affidavit, which is required as per the proviso to s. 83(1)(c) has to be given in Form 25 as per the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Ord. VII r. 11. [Paras 6, 8, 9, 12]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.