VED PRAKASH GAUR Vs. SUKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. The preliminary objection in respect of this petition is that it is liable to dismissal under Section 86 read with sub-section (3) of Section 81 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (the: Act). According to Section 86, the High, Court shall dismiss an election petition which does not comply with the provisions. of Section 81. Sub-section (3) of Section 81 of the Act is as follows: "(3) Every election petition shall be accompanied by as many copies thereof as there are respondents mentioned in the petition and every such copy shall be attested by the petitioner under his own signature to be a true copy of the petition."

(2.) What the petitioner has done here is to have supplied photostat copies of the petition without the requisite attestation. Mr. Shubh on behalf of the petitioner submitted that a photostat copy meets the requirements of sub-section (3). For. this proposition, he relies upon Sharif-Ud-Din v. Abdul Gani Lone, AIR 1980 SC 303, wherein the Supreme Court observed as follows (at page 309): "The object of requiring the copy of an election petition to be attested by the petitioner under his own signature to be a true copy of the petition appears to be that the petitioner should take full responsibility for its contents and that the respondent or respondents should have in their possession a copy of the petition duly attested under the signature of the petitioner to be the true copy of the petition at the earliest possible opportunity to prevent any unauthorised alteration or tampering of the contents of the original petition after it is filed into Court." The Supreme Court in the said decision has also said that the emphasis is on the words "under his own signatures". Mr. Shubh now contends that the copy supplied by him bears the signature in original, being the photostat copy thereof and, therefore, there can be no and should there be no slavish insistence upon a copy to be attested by the petitioner under his own signatures to be a true copy of the petition. On the other hand, it complies with the High Court Rules which require that the copy should be page- by-page and line-by-line. The petition, therefore, does not attract the penalty of dismissal.

(3.) I have considered the matter. It appears to me that since the provisions of Section 86 are mandatory, the letter and spirit of law both must be complied with in case of election petitions. It cannot be denied that the copy which has been filed along with the election petition, was not attested by the petitioner under his own signatures to be a true copy of the petition. Therefore, there is non-compliance of sub-section (3) of Section 81 of the Act entailing dismissal of the petition.