The burden of proving corrupt practices is on the petitioner, and concrete evidence is required to establish allegations of corrupt practices and non-disclosure of expenses.

ORDER :

(Prayer: Election Petition filed under Sections 80, 80A, 81 read with Sections 77, 78, 100, 101, 123, 125, 126, 127-A & 129 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, praying

(a) to declare the election of the first respondent to the No.006 Avadi Assembly Constituency in Tamil Nadu on19.05.2016 as illegal and void;

(b) to declare the petitioner as being elected to the No.006 Avadi Assembly Constituency in Tamil Nadu;

(c) to direct the first respondent to pay the cost of the petition to the petitioner.)

The petitioner challenges the declaration of the first respondent as the successful candidate in the Elections for the State Legislature held on 16.05.2016. The first respondent was declared as the successful candidate and the margin of difference was about 1395 votes. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the election of the first respondent to No.6 Avadi Assembly Constituency in the elections held on 19.05.2016 as illegal and void and consequentially declare the petitioner as the elected candidate.

2. The grounds on which the petitioner seeks the above declaration are that the first respondent has indulged in corrupt practices and other electoral offences viz., non disclosure of actual expenses, bribery, promotion of hatred and enmity on the grounds of caste, transportation of voters, making false statements against the petitioner, use of official machinery for election purposes, etc. The petitioner also claims that the election officials have indulged in several irregularities, viz., failure to reverify the postal ballots, discrepancies in Form 17-C and announcement about the Prime Minister, congratulating the Former Chief Minister J.Jayalalithaa.

3. The substantive allegations in the petition are that the first respondent has indulged in corrupt practices by bribing voters and failing to disclose the actual expenses. There has been an improper rejection of votes. Appeals have been made to the voters on communal lines, voters have been transported to the booth on the polling day, there has been an excess expenditure of about Rs.28,00,000/-, and Government Servants have been engaged for campaigning. The first respondent has paid for advertisement through digital media like bulk emails, SMS, whatsapp messages, voice calls etc., and those expenses have been suppressed in the returns filed before the Special Observer.

4. It is also claimed that the first respondent has brought thousands of men and women from his native place, viz. Virudhunagar and those persons were staying in rented accommodation during the period of campaign. It is alleged that they were completely taken care of by the first respondent and the expenditure incurred has been suppressed. It is also claimed that the first respondent had not shown the expenses incurred by him in conduct of Rallies on 28.04.2016 and Go Green Marathon on 30.04.2016, expenses incurred in paid interviews, expenses incurred in advertisements in Newspapers, campaign expenditure incurred by engaging two–wheelers, three-wheerlers, and four-wheelers were not reflected in the expenditure statement which would, according to the petitioner, amount to corrupt practice under the provisions of Section 123 of the Representation of People Act. It is also claimed that the first respondent's men had distributed 500 rupee notes to the voters and were caught red handed. On the above allegations, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the election is void.

5. The first respondent alone is contesting the petition. He has filed a counter denying all the allegations made in the petition, it is claimed that the entire petition is based on surmises and conjunctures. The claims made regarding corrupt practices or failure on the part of the officers concerned are unsubstantiated statements lacking in material. The claim that circulation of booth slips door to door along with letter containing the photograph an