IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) ITANAGAR PERMANENT BENCH
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Hayeng Mangfi Son Of Late Tangu Mangfi – Appellant
Versus
Kompu Dolo, Son of Late Tagung Rebe – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.
1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. I. Das, learned counsel for the Elected Candidate. Also heard Mr. M. G. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent. The present application is filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the C.P.C. 1908, read with Section 83 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the RP Act, 1951), praying for rejection of the Election Petition No. 01(AP)/2024 for want of cause of action.
2. Brief facts till filing of the Election Petition:-
2.1. A notification dated 20.03.2024 was issued by the Chief Electoral Officer, Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, under Section 15 (1) of the RP Act, 1951. Subsequently, notice under Section 30 and Section 56 of the Act, 1951 were issued for election to the 9 Chayang Tajo (ST) Assembly Constituency, along with other constituency.
2.2. The last date of filing nomination was fixed on 27.03.2024 and the date of scrutiny of nomination was on 28.03.2024. The election petitioner as well as the respondents filed their respective nomination papers.
2.3. On 28.03.2024, the nominations filed by the parties were scrutinized by Returning Officer and the nominations pa
Azhar Hussain –Vs- Rajiv Gandhi
Hari Shanker Jain –Vs- Sonia Gandhi
Azhar Hussain –Vs- Rajiv Gandhi
Dhartipakar Madam Lal Agarwal –Vs- Rajiv Gandhi
C.P. John –Vs- Babu M. Palissery
Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao –Vs- BalasahebVikhe Patil
Lalit Kishore Chaturvedi –Vs- Jagdish Prasad Thada
Satish Ukey -Vs- Devendra Gangadharrao Fadnavis
Dr. Ramachandran –Vs- R. V. Janakiraman
P.V.Guru Raj Reddy –Vs- P. Neeradha Reddy
Srihari Numandas Totala –Vs- Hemant Vithal Kamat
Ashraf Kokkur –Vs- K. V. Abdul Khader and Ors
Madiraju Venkata Ramana Raju –Vs- Peddireddigari Ramchandra Reddy & Ors
Election petitions under the Representation of Peoples Act must provide precise allegations of corrupt practices to disclose a valid cause of action; vague claims do not suffice.
Election petitions alleging affidavit suppression must plead full corrupt practice particulars including pendency and material election result effect for improper acceptance; deficiency invites Order....
Election petitions must plead concise material facts under Section 83(1)(a) RP Act to disclose cause of action; deficient, vague pleadings warrant dismissal under Order VII Rule 11 CPC without trial.
Candidates must fully disclose criminal cases and asset details during elections, as failure constitutes corrupt practice under the Representation of People Act, impacting informed voting.
An election petition may be dismissed summons under CPC if it fails to disclose a triable cause of action; non-disclosure of material liabilities can render an election void under the Representation ....
Non-compliance with election expenditure accounting does not constitute corrupt practice unless it materially affects election results.
Election petitions must contain concise statements of material facts; omission of a single material fact leads to dismissal for lack of cause of action.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.