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.

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 papers submitted by the election petitioner as well as the respondent elected candidate were accepted.

2.4. On 19.04.2024, the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative election was held as set out by the Election Commission of India vide notification dated 20.03.2024, including the 9 Chayang Tajo (ST) Assembly Constituency of East Kameng District.

2.5. On 22.04.2024, a representation was filed by the election petitioner for cancellation and re-poll of Nari Camp Polling Station 17, Kapu Dada Polling Station 32, Veo Polling Station 2, Krema Pao Polling Station 19 on the ground of alleged booth capturing, booth rigging, and malpractice by the Elected Candidate. Certain allegations regarding wrong acceptance of the nomination paper of the elected candidate was also raised and the same was rejected by the Returning Officer contending that during the scrutiny of Form 17A (Voters List) and other documents on 21.04.2024, the Election Petitioner’s election agent, did not make any complaints about the four polling stations. On 24.04.2024, similar representation was filed before the General Observer for the cancellation and re-poll of Nari Cap Polling Station 17, Kapu Dada Polling Station 32, Veo Polling Station 2, Krema Pao Polling Station 19 on the ground of alleged booth capturing, booth rigging and malpractice by the Elected Candidate.

2.6. On 02.06.2024, the result of the 9 Chayang Tajo (ST) Assembly th Constituency for the 11 Arunachal Pradesh Assembly Election was declared, declaring the Elected Candidate as return candidate with 8,809 votes as opposed to 2,214 votes for the Election Petitioner.

3. Arguments on behalf of the Elected Candidate:

Mr. D. Das, learned Senior Counsel for the Elected Candidate had made elaborate and extensive arguments as many as on …. Dates and accordingly his arguments are summarised in the following manner:

3.1 Booth Capturing/Booth Rigging/Malpractice

3.1.1 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Azhar Hussain –Vs- Rajiv Gandhi reported in 1986 Supp SCC 315 held that when alleging corrupt practice, the election petitioner must state with exactness the time of assistance, the manner of assistance, the persons from whom assistance was obtained or procured, the time and date of the same must be precisely stated. In the instant election petition, the Election Petitioner failed to attribute the allegations to the Elected Candidate and made bald and vague statements without basis. It is seeking a roving and fishing inquiry from this Hon’ble Court.

3.1.2 Moreover, though the Election Petitioner has alleged voters were intimidated and their votes were forcibly cast in favour of the Elected Candidate, there is no FIR from said voters lodged against the Elected Candidate and/or his election agent. Additionally, assuming, while not admitting, that votes purported