HIMMAT KOTHARI Vs. PARASMAL SAKLECHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order is for the mode of evidence and examination of the witnesses in this Election Petition. It has been argued on behalf of the Respondent that since the charges against the respondents are of corrupt practice under the Representation of People Act (for short the Act) hence they have to be proved like criminal charges, therefore, the trial of this petition should be like a criminal case and charges should be actually proved and should not be based on preponderance and probabilities as in civil cases. The evidence should not be recorded through affidavits.

(2.) It has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that according to Section 87 of the Act, election petition has to be tried in accordance with the procedure applicable under the Code of Civil Procedure to the trial of the suits. Hence evidence may be recorded by affidavits. The charges of corrupt practices has to be proved by the petitioner but the respondent is not going to be punished under the criminal law; hence no question arises that this petition should be decided in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. Only charges of corrupt practices has to be proved with the other grounds on the basis of evidence and not to be decided on preponderance and probabilities.

(3.) Considered arguments.