N. Chaudhury, J.

This is an application under Order 6, Rule 16 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for striking out of pleadings in Election Petition No. 1/2015. The aforesaid election petition has been presented by an elector of Zhadima village in the district 111'Kohima challenging the election of the returned candidate who is the sole respondent on the ground of bribery. In paragraph 7 and 11 of the election petition two individual and distinct incidents have been mentioned by the election petitioner as grounds for setting aside the election of the returned candidate. The aforesaid two paragraphs relate to bribery. The whole election petition, therefore, is to be viewed from the stand point as to whether the paragraphs of the election petition are in conformity with such prayer made by the election petitioner and as to whether any unnecessary, frivolous and vexatious statements have been made which may amount to abuse of the process of the court.

2. The applicant herein being the returned candidate has agitated that the averments made by the election petitioner are full of unnecessary, scandalous and vexatious statements which only embarrass the trial and the public image of the returned candidate. The averments made in the election petition do not have any causal connection with the purpose sought to be achieved. Referring to paragraph 6 of the election petition, it is stated that the election petitioner has made bald and wild allegation against the whole State. Particularly, five lines of paragraph 6 have received strong criticism from the applicant herein to be scandalous, frivolous and vexatious statements. The said five lines of paragraph 6 are quoted below for ready reference:-

"6. That the Petitioner states that Nagaland ranks one of the most corrupt States in India. Despite being one of the smallest states in India, election in Nagaland is the most expensive in India. Vote selling and buying with hard cash has become an established practise. Selling one's vote is no longer considered wrong."

3. Similarly, the applicant has challenged the averments made in paragraph 7 of the election petition wherein after having named only three persons, the election petitioner has proceeded to make allegation that the returned candidate wanted to influence all the 13 clans of Zhadima village for securing votes in his favour. Allegation was made that 5 representatives from each of the clan had attended the alleged meeting held on 09.10.2014 but thereafter details of the 5 persons have not been furnished. Although it is alleged that each of the voters had got Rs. 3,000/- but the total shown in that paragraph does not justify such allegations. According to the applicant, these statements only go to show that the statements are unnecessary, frivolous and vexatious without having any iota of truth in it. The applicant, therefore, prays that the paragraph 7 of the election petition is liable to be struck out under Order 6, Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4. Coming to paragraph 8 of the election petition, it is the case of the applicant that there is an allegation about lodging of FIR with police. Chief Electoral Officer and also Chief Electoral Commissioner. According to the applicant, these allegations are devoid of any particulars.

5. Paragraph 9 of the election petition discloses that there was raid by Income Tax Department in the house of Peter Kuotsu in connection with the FIR lodged by the election petitioner and this was true to the knowledge of the election petitioner. According to the applicant, these statements have also no grain of truth in it and election petitioner is not supposed to have any personal knowledge in regard thereto. The statements are rather abuse of the process of the court to confuse the mind of the court.

6. Criticising the pleadings made in paragraph 10 of the election petition, the applicant states that the election petitioner herself claimed to have received i