SURESH KUMAR VERMA Vs. AMAN DUTT SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dtd. 9/11/2021 passed by learned Election Tribunal, whereby, an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Sec. 15 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, filed at the instance of petitioner-respondent No.6-Suresh Kumar Verma, was dismissed.

(2.) The facts germane, to be noticed, are as follows:-

(3.) Therein, it was claimed that respondent No.6-petitioner Suresh Kumar Verma, as per provisions of the ibid Act, was unfit, disqualified and ineligible candidate. It was asserted that the various directions/guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in WP(C) No.536 of 2011, vide judgment dtd. 25/9/2018, rendered in case titled as 'Public Interest Foundation and Ors. vs. Union of India and Anr.' were not complied with. Therein, it was also asserted that in the nomination papers, imperative information, which was required to be compulsorily disclosed, in the form of an affidavit, was not disclosed. Rather, the petitioner-respondent No.6, with malafide intention, concealed with the material information, vis-a-vis, detail of the pending criminal case against him and status of the same. Also, it was asserted that he had, though, only mentioned about involvement in the criminal case under Sec. 379 and 411 IPC, whereas, FIR No.73 dtd. 17/2/2013, was got registered under Ss. 457, 380 and 411 IPC. In fact, there was no mention made of Sec. 379 IPC, in the FIR. Relating to the same, it was also further averred that the imposition of punishment, qua Ss. under which the FIR was registered, were more grave, but however, such information was never disclosed.