SC: Election Petition against elected candidate on the ground that he gave bribe to another candidate to induce him to file nomination papers who was name sake of Election Petitioner to cause confusion among votors - Allegation not supported by proper affidavit - Election petition dismissed. Case: C.P. John v. Babu M. Palissery Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 5987-5988 of 2012. D/d. 11.9.2014. A. Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 8(1)(ii)(iii) and 33-A - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Sections 33-A, 8(i), (ii) and (3) - Elected candidate convicted in a criminal offence and sentenced to less than one year - He is not required to disclose this information in nomination paper - He is to furnish this information if conviction and sentence was for a period of one year or more. [Para 47] B. Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, Rule 94-A - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Sections 83(1)(b) and 123(1)(a) - Election petition alleging corrupt practice - Election petition should specifically state the names of the parties who alleged to have committed such corrupt practice and also the date and place where such corrupt practice was committed - In other words, the particulars relating to corrupt practice should not be lacking in any respect - One who reads the averments relating to corrupt practice should be in a position to gather every minute detail about the alleged corrupt practice such as the names of the persons, the nature of the alleged corrupt practice indulged in by such person or persons, the place, the date, the time and every other detail relating to the alleged corrupt practice - Further held :- (i) The purpose is that when the Election Petition is taken up for consideration, the Court which deals with such an Election Petition, should be in a position to know in exactitude as to what is the corrupt practice alleged as against the parties without giving any room for doubt as to the nature of such allegation, the parties involved, the date, time and the place etc. so that the party against whom such allegation is made is in a position to explain or defend any such allegation without giving scope for any speculation. [Paras 18, 19, 20 and 21] C. Representation of the People Act, 1951, Sections 123(1)(a) and 83(1)(b) - Election Petition by Appellant against elected candidate on the ground that he induced Respondent to file nomination papers by an offer of gratification for a gift of र 50,000 with a promise to pay र 1,00,000/- after the elections and that the said inducement was made by the First Respondent with the ulterior motive of creating a confusion among the voters and divide the votes, inasmuch as, the names of the Appellant as well as that of Second Respondent are identical - The said allegations not supported by proper Affidavit as required under Section 83(1) of the Act - petitioner rightly dismissed by High Court.
Posted on: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 09:23:03 +0000