SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
THAKKAR,M.P. (J)
AZHAR HUSSAIN – Appellant
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI – Respondent
/ 0
25-04-1986
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Page 1 of 27
PETITIONER:
AZHAR HUSSAIN
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
RAJIV GANDHI
DATE OF JUDGMENT25/04/1986
BENCH:
THAKKAR, M.P. (J)
BENCH:
THAKKAR, M.P. (J)
VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)
CITATION:
1986 AIR 1253 1986 SCR (2) 782
1986 SCC Supl. 315 1986 SCALE (1)573
CITATOR INFO :
R 1987 SC1577 (4,10,28)
R 1987 SC1926 (4)
F 1990 SC 924 (29)
R 1990 SC1731 (9,10)
ACT:
Representation of the People Act, 1951 :
Section 80 to 83, 86 & 87 - Election Petition -
Mandatory requirement to furnish material facts and
particulars - Non compliance - Summary dismissal of election
petition - What are material particulars to be incorporated
in an Election Petition.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 6 Rule 16 and Order
7 Rule 11(a) - Election Petition - Applicability of.
HEADNOTE:
The respondent having secured the highest votes in the
1984 general elections was declared elected as a Member of
the Lok Sabha from the Amethi Constituency of Uttar Pradesh.
On the last date for challenging the election, the
appellant, an elector from that constituency filed an
election petition challenging the election of the respondent
alleging various corrupt practices. The respondent upon
being served, instead of filing a written statement, raised
preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petition
contending that the petition was lacking in material facts
and particulars and was defective on that account, and that
since it did not disclose any cause of action it deserved to
be dismissed.
The High Court upheld the preliminary objection of the
respondent and dismissed the petition.
In the appeal to this Court on behalf of the appellant
it was contended : (1) that where the legislature wanted to
provide for summary dismissal of the election petition, the
legislature has spoken on the matter and that the intention
was to provide for summary dismissal only in case of failure
to comply with the requirement of sections 81, 82 and 117
and not section 83; (2) that the powers to reject an
election petition summarily under the provisions of the Code
of Civil
783
Procedure should not be exercised at the threshold, and that
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Page 2 of 27
the Court must proceed with the trial, record the evidence,
and only after the trial of the election petition is
concluded that the powers under the Code of Civil Procedure
for dealing with the defective petition which does not
disclose cause of action should be exercised.
Dismissing the appeal,
^
HELD : 1. The results of an election are subject to
judicial scrutiny and control only with an eye on two ends.
First, to ascertain that the ’true’ will of the people is
reflected in the results and second, to secure that only the
persons who are eligible and qualified under the
Constitution obtain the representation. In order that the
"true will" is ascertained the Courts will step in to
protect and safeguard the purity of Elections, for, if
corrupt practices have influenced the result, or the
electorate has been a victim of fraud or deception or
compulsion on any essential matter, the will of the people
as recorded in their votes is not the ’free and true’ will
exercised intelligently by deliberate choice. It is not the
will of the people in the true sense at all. And the Courts
would, therefore, be justified in setting aside the election
in accordance with the law if the corrupt practices are
established. So also when the essential qualifications for
eligibility demanded by the constitutional requirement are
not fulfilled, the fact that the successful candidate is the
true choice of the people is a consideration which is
totally irrelevant notwithstanding the fact that it would be
virtually impossible