JUDGMENT :

(Rajnish Kumar, J.) :

This Election Petition has been filed under Sections 80 , 80A/81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred as the Act) by the petitioner, namely Satyavir Tyagi challenging the election of the sole respondent Shri Shahid Manzoor (the returned candidate) as a Member of the State Legislative Assembly from 46-Kithore Constituency (hereinafter referred as the Constituency) as a Member of the U.P. State Legislative Assembly.

2. The General Elections for constituting new house of Legislative Assembly of U.P. State Legislative Assembly was notified by the Governor of the Uttar Pradesh. As per Notification with respect to the Constituency the following election schedule was declared by the Election Commission of India :

A. Last date of nomination .....21.1.2022

B. Date for scrutiny of nomination papers.......24.1.2022

C. Date for withdrawal of candidature..........27.1.2022

D. Date for poll....................10.2.2022

E. Date for counting of votes..10.3.2022

F. Date of declaration of result..... ..............10.3.2022

3. In the aforesaid election for the 46-Kithore Constituency, 13 candidates had filed nomination papers including the petitioner and the respondent. The petitioner had filed the nomination papers as a candidate of the Bhartiya Janta Party and he was allotted the symbol 'Lotus' (Kamal). The respondent had filed the nomination as a candidate of the Samajwadi Party and he was allotted the symbol of 'Bicycle'. The voting of the election in question took place by two modes; one by postal ballot papers and second voting by Electronic Voting Machines (E.V.M.). After election and counting of votes, the result was declared by the Returning Officer. The petitioner received 104924 votes and the respondent received 107104 votes. Accordingly the respondent was declared as elected/returned candidate from the Constituency.

4. The present Election Petition challenging the election of the respondent was presented before this Court on 23.4.2022. Shri Bharat Singh Pal, Advocate filed 'Vakalatnama' on behalf of Petitioner on 23.5.2022. The notices were issued to the respondent vide order dated 23.5.2022. In response to that the respondent appeared and filed the written statement on 12.7.2022. After filing of the written statement the respondent filed an application under Order VI Rule 16 and Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred as CPC) praying for striking out paragraphs 8 to 13 and paragraphs 15 to 21 of the petition and reject/dismiss the petition under Order VII Rule 11(a) of CPC with a prayer to pass such other and further order or direction as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. The petitioner filed the counter-affidavit to the said application and replication to the written statement filed by the respondent/applicant. The respondent filed the rejoinder-affidavit to the counter-affidavit filed by the petitioner against the application under Order VI Rule 16 and Order VII rule 11 CPC.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent/applicant submitted that the Election Petition has been filed with unnecessary, frivolous and vexatious pleadings without disclosing the material facts and particulars of corrupt practices alleged to have been committed by the respondent/applicant. The Petition does not contain material facts and particulars of alleged corrupt practices committed by the respondent/applicant as provided under Section 83 (b) of the Act. The pleadings are vague and based on surmises and conjectures, which are liable to be stru