LAWS(DLH)-2009-8-130

MANGE RAM GARG Vs. HARI SHANKAR GUPTA

Decided On August 12, 2009
MANGE RAM GARG Appellant
V/S
HARI SHANKAR GUPTA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this application made under Section 86 (5) of the Representation of People act, 1951 read with Order VI Rule 17 CPC the applicant/petitioner has sought to make amendments in the Election Petition. It is stated by the applicant/petitioner that the petitioner had made allegations in para 10 of the election petition about distribution of packets of sweets and food to the voters and to the children of voters on 18th November, 2008 and 22nd November, 2008. In para 19, the dates regarding distribution were mentioned as 18th November, 2008 to 22nd november, 2008. It is submitted that in fact the distribution of sweets and food packets by respondent no. 1 and his election agents had started on 16th november, 2008 and continued up to 22 nd November, 2008. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to amend paras no. 10 and 19 of the petition. In para 10 of the petition, he seeks to amend the dates of distribution of sweets and food packets from "16th November, 2008 to 22nd November 2008" in place of "18th November, 2008 and 22nd November, 2008" similarly para 19 he seeks leave to replace "18th november 2008 to 22nd November, 2008" by "16th November, 2008 to 22nd November, 2008".

(2.) THE other amendment sought by the election petitioner is in para 18 of the petition. In para 18 of the petition, the petitioner had stated that respondent no. 1 contravened Section 77 of the Act since respondent no. 1 had not shown the actual expenses incurred by him during election and not maintained the accounts of the expenses incurred by him in accordance with law, which shall amount to violation of law and shall amount to corrupt practices. The petitioner now wants to make following additional submissions in para 18 of the petition:

(3.) IT is submitted by the applicant/petitioner that by way of amendments, the petitioner only seeks to give the particulars of corrupt practices and non-compliance of rules, already stated in the petition. No new corrupt practice was sought to be introduced in the petition by the petitioner therefore, the application be allowed.