Election petitions must adhere strictly to statutory requirements regarding disclosures, verification, and affidavits; noncompliance may lead to dismissal at the threshold.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Dr. L.P. Misra, assisted by Sri Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent on the objections so raised against the maintainability of the election petition and Mohd. Altaf Mansoor, assisted by Sri Tanay Chaudhary, learned counsel for the election petitioner.

2. Since learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that his application for rejection/dismissal of the election petition may be considered as an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, therefore, that application which is bearing Civil Misc. Application/I.A. No.2 of 2022 is being decided by means of the following order.

3. This is an election petition filed by Mohhamad Aslam alias Mohhamad Aslam Raeeni, the petitioner, through his counsel Mohd. Altaf Mansoor challenging the declaration of election dated 10.03.2022 issued by Returning Officer of 290-Shrawasti Constituency in the General Elections Uttar Pradesh-2022 in favour of the respondent as duly elected Member of the State Legislative Assembly mainly on the ground of non-disclosure of criminal cases, non-disclosure of complete assets in the nomination paper, inconsistent educational qualification and inconsistent age in the nomination paper and other documents.

4. Notices were issued to the respondent in terms of Chapter XVA Rule 5 & 6 of the ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RULES , 1952 on 21.04.2022. As per office report dated 24.05.2022, the election petitioner had made compliance of Rules 5 & 6 of the High Court Rules inasmuch as to serve notice upon the respondent. Notices through registered AD post has been issued. The notice was published in “Dainik Jagran” Hindi Newspaper. Besides, the notice has been sent through ordinary post. Hence, service of notice is sufficient in the light of Order V Rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) upon the respondent. On 30.05.2022, Sri Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent. On 01.08.2022, an application for rejection/dismissal of the election petition has been filed by Dr. L.P. Misra alongwith Sri Rajeiu Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent. On 17.08.2022, Mohd. Altaf Mansoor alongwith Sri Tanay Chaudhary has filed application for dismissal of the application filed by the respondent. On 01.11.2022, Dr. L.P. Misra has submitted that the application for rejection/dismissal of the election petition may be considered as application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC. He has further submitted that the election petition is not maintainable inasmuch as there are some apparent defects in the election petition and those defects may be removed, if the election petitioner files any appropriate application to that effect. Mohd. Altaf Mansoor has submitted that he shall not file any application seeking cure of the defects, which have been pointed out by Dr. L.P. Misra.

5. Before adverting to the objections