A.MANJU Vs. PRAJWAL REVANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The moot point for consideration in the present appeal is whether an election petition can be thrown out at the threshold on a plea of the respondent/elected candidate that the petition is not supported by an affidavit in Form 25, as prescribed under Rule 94A of Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, even though the petition is based on allegations of corrupt practices.

(2.) The appellant was a candidate from 16 Hassan (General) Parliamentary Constituency (for short 'Constituency') in the 2019 elections and was stated to have been sponsored by the Bharatiya Janata Party. Respondent No.1 was sponsored by Janatha Dal Secular Party and was also a candidate from the Constituency. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 were sponsored by local/regional parties but, as transpired from the elections, were not serious contestants in real terms. The Election Commission of India issued a notification on 12/1/2019 appointing a Returning Officer to the Constituency where elections were held on 18/4/2019. The appellant secured 5,35,282 votes while respondent no.1 secured 6,76,606 votes. The other respondents secured only marginal votes.

(3.) The appellant preferred an election petition under Sec. 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'RP Act') on 26/6/2019 challenging the election of respondent no.1. The appellant sought a declaration that respondent no.1's election was liable to be declared void on account of respondent no.1 having filed a false affidavit and consequently the appellant should be declared as duly elected on account of his having secured the second highest votes. This petition was resisted by respondent no.1 at the threshold who filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Code') and Sec. 86(1) of the RP Act seeking dismissal of the election petition on account of non-compliance of Sec. 81(3) and the proviso to Sec. 83(1) of the RP Act.