The failure to provide a concise statement of material facts in an election petition renders it liable for summary dismissal under Sections 83 and 100 of the Representation of People Act.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner, who is the respondent No.1 in E.P.No.15 of 2024, filed this petition under Rule-11 of Order-VII read with Section 151 of CPC to reject the Election Petition.

2. Heard Sri J.Ramchander Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner/respondent No.1 and Sri Golla Seshadri, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/Election Petitioner.

The contentions of the Petitioner/Respondent No.1

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.1 filed Election Petition to declare the election of the petitioner from Assembly of No.33-Siddipet Assembly Constituency, Siddipet District, State of Telangana held on 03.12.2023 as illegal, null and void and to call for the records. He submits that the petitioner herein was elected as Member of Legislative Assembly from Siddipet Assembly Constituency for seven times and served as Minister in several portfolios. The nomination of the petitioner was thoroughly checked, scrutinized by the Officer and upon due verification, his nomination was accepted. The elections were conducted in a free and fair manner and the petitioner won the election with the majority of 83,025 votes and the respondent No.1/Election Petitoiner got total votes of 16,610 and the election petition is filed with a malafide intention to upset the election results based on mere bald allegations that the information disclosed in Form 26 of the nomination by the petitioner was inaccurate. He submits that none of allegations made in the election petition are supported by either primary documents or reliable source of information and as per Section 83 (1)(b) of Representation of People Act, 1951 (for short ‘the Act 1951’), the allegation of corrupt practice has to be supported by all the documents and material facts with date and time.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has given all the detailed information and particulars with regard to criminal cases pending against him and also the cases in which he was punished. The petitioner has mentioned all the details pertaining to the assets i.e, movable and immovable properties in his election affidavit and the respondent No.1 has made bald allegations without any primary documents or reliable source of information. He submits that the allegations in the election petition are not material facts but are facts based speculation and do not disclose any triable issue and the election petition can be initiated and entertained only when there is proper ground of contention which can be considered.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per Section 77 of the Act, 1951, the petitioner has maintained separate account for the election expenditure and the same was submitted to the District Election Officer under Section 78 of the Act, 1951. He submits that the respondent No.1 without filing any primary documents or reliable source of information to support his allegation has made bald and vague allegations with regard to the expenditure and as such, the election petition is liable to be rejected.

6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the election petition lacks concise statement of material facts as contemplated under Section 83 (a) of the Act, 1951 and lacks full particulars of the alleged corrupt practic