Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

1. This petition questions the election of the respondent no.1 as the Member (from the Sultanpur Majra Constituency) of the Legislative Assembly of Delhi in the election held on 29th November, 2008.

2. The un-rebutted facts are, i) that the Notification for the election was issued on 4th November, 2008; ii) that the Sultanpur Majra Constituency is reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidates; iii) that the Nominations were to be filed by 1500 hrs. on 11th November, 2008 and were scrutinized on 12th November, 2008; iv) that out of the total number of 1,32,421 electors, only 82,047 valid votes were polled; iv) that in the result of the election declared on 8th December, 2008, the respondent no.1 was found to have secured 39542 votes and the petitioner found to have secured 20867 votes, with the remaining votes distributed between the respondents no. 2-10 contestants; v) that the respondent no.1 was accordingly declared elected on 8th December, 2008.

3. The petitioner questions the election pleading that-

i. On 5th December, 2008, the petitioner, in response to a query under the Right to Information Act, 2005, received information of the following criminal cases “registered” against the respondent no.1 at various Police Stations at Delhi;

S.No. FIR Nos. Date Under Section P.S.

1. 162/83 21.9.83 147, 148, 149, Sultanpuri

186, 353, 332, 333,

427, 307, 436 IPC

2. 115/94 29.9.94 160, 323 IPC Civil Line

3. 1034/97 14.11.97 186, 332, 353, 34 IPC Sultanpuri

4. 677/01 4.6.2001 186, 332, 353, 34 IPC Sultanpuri

5. 47/06 14.10.06 323, 506, 34 IPC Sultanpuri

6. 538/07 1.4.07 323, 427, 452, 506, 34 IPC Sultanpuri

7. 464/99 - 186, 353, 332, 506, 34 IPC Mangolpuri

8. 1984 23.10.84 307, 333, 436 IPC Sultanpuri

ii. that the petitioner, in response to another query under the RTI Act, received information on 1st January, 2009 that the respondent no.1 was not the student of C.R.Z. Senior Secondary School, Sonepat, Haryana from which the respondent no.1 as per information given by him in his Election Nomination Form claimed to have matriculated in the year 1981;

iii. that the respondent no.1, in the affidavit submitted by him alongwith his Nomination Form (and which affidavit is available online on the website of Election Commission Office), a) had suppressed the material facts regarding criminal cases aforesaid registered against him; and, b) had falsely claimed himself to be educated upto class 12th and having Matriculation from C.R.Z. Senior Secondary School, Sonepat, Haryana.

4. It is further the plea of the petitioner, “a) that furnishing false or wrong information in the affidavit filed alongwith the nomination and as per the direction dated 28th June, 2002 of the Election Commission of India amounts to corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of People Act, 1951;

b) that the wrong information about his personal character so furnished by the respondent no.1 was calculated to prejudice the election of the petitioner;

c) that the respondent no.1 was accused in case FIRs 250/1984 and 251/1984 of Police Station Sultanpuri under Sections 147,148,149,395,396, 397,303,496,427 and 201 of the IPC registered on 31st October, 1984 after assassination of Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi;

d) that there are near about 47000 Sikh voters residing in the Sultanpuri Majra Constituency;

e) that 25% of the voters in the Constituency are from the age group of 18-22 years and “these cases” having been registered against the respondent no.1 before their birth, are not aware of the accusation against the respondent no.1;

f) that the petitioner in his affidavit filed alongwith his Nomination Form had declared himself uneducated;

g) that the respondent no.1 falsely published himself as educated upto 12th class to attract the prospect of majority of electors;

h) this was the main arm for strategy of election adopted by respondent no.1 throughout the canvassing duri