SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(P&H) 261

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANOOP CHITKARA
Manpreet Sirswa – Appellant
Versus
Jai Parkash – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rajiv Malhotra

Table of Content
1. election petitions must comply with legal requirements. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner claims eligibility and presents evidence. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. locus standi and cause of action are essential. (Para 6 , 10)
4. dismissal of petitions can occur at the threshold. (Para 12 , 15 , 19)
5. strict adherence to material facts is required for election petitions. (Para 16 , 18 , 24 , 25)
6. petition rejected due to lack of cause of action. (Para 26)

JUDGMENT :

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

1. Seeking setting aside of the election of the 04-Hisar Parliamentary Constituency where respondent No.1 Jai Parkash was elected as member of Parliament where result was declared on 04.06.2024, and further to order a fresh election for the same and initiating proceedings under Section 8A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 for disqualifying the elected member of Parliament i.e. respondent No.1 for six years from contesting any election, for having committed a corrupt practice, the petitioner came up before this Court by filing the present Election petition under Sections 80-83 read with Section 100, 123(2) read with Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and all other enabling provi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top