Election petitions must contain specific material facts and particulars; vagueness can lead to dismissal, but if triable issues exist, the petition should proceed to trial.

COMMON ORDER

The first respondent herein filed election petition ELP. No. 4 of 2024 challenging the Election held on 19.04.2024 for 34, Virudhunagar Parliamentary Constituency on the grounds of improper acceptance of the nomination of the respondent/applicant herein and also for suppressing the material facts in the nomination papers regarding the entire assets and criminal antecedents; bribing of voters-congress party guarantee card and cash distribution; votes were not counted due to erase of mock poll votes; booth capturing; stoppage of vote counting; expenditure has been incurred more than the amount prescribed by the ECI and malpractices during counting of postal ballots.

2. After serving of summons on the respondents in the Election Petition, the first respondent/applicant filed these applications in OA.Nos. 921 and 922 of 2024 to strike out the pleadings in paragraphs 6 to 9, 11 to 16, 18 to 28, 32 to 37, 40 and 42 and to dismiss the Election Petition respectively.

3. In both the applications under Order VI Rule 16, Order VII Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure and Order XIV Rule 8 of Original Side Rules supported by affidavits submitting that the election petition does not disclose any cause of action, the pleadings were lacking in precision and were vague, unspecific, ambiguous and irrelevant to some extent also scandalous and hence amounted to abuse of process of the Court, the pleadings did not disclose any cause of action worth being tried by this Court and paragraphs 6 to 9, 11 to 16, 18 to 28, 32 to 37, 40 and 42 of the Election petition No.4 of 2024 is liable to be struck off and therefore, the election petition is liable to be rejected.

4. The first respondent filed counter affidavits in both the applications stating that he has denied the averments made in the affidavit and stated that the election petition discloses the cause of action and the material facts and particulars, the allegations are relevant and essential to grant relief sought for in the election petition filed under the Representation of People Act, 1951 [herein after referred to as “RP Act”] and there is no ground to either strike off the pleadings or to reject election petition and the same are liable to be dismissed.

5. The learned senior counsel for the applicant in OA.Nos. 921 and 922 of 2024/first respondent in Election Petition No.4 of 2024 would submit that as per Section 83 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 the 1^st respondent/election petitioner cannot maintain the election petition without pleading material facts and full particulars as to how the election has materially affected the results in the election. It is alleged that the applicant committed corrupt practice and raised the same as one of the grounds to declare the election as null and void without setting forth the material facts and full particulars of the corrupt practice alleged by him. The 1^st respondent/election petitioner does not disclose any grounds under the Act to declare the election as null and void. The non compliance of the mandatory requirement under the provisions of the Act warrants the rejection of the election petition. The 1^st respondent/election petitioner has come forward with vague pleadings and the same does not disclose any cause of action. The election petitioner has not pleaded material particulars and material facts. As per Section 83(1)(a) of the Act, the election petition should contain concise statement of material facts on which the election petitioner relies upon and as per Sectio