ANAND MOHAN Vs. ANWARUL HAQUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an order on an application filed by respondent No. 1 under section 86(1) of Representation of People Act, 1951 (in short, the Act) read with Order 6, rule 16 and Order 7, rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, CPC) for noncompliance of mandatory provisions of sections 81, 82, 83 and 117 of the Act and rejoinder to this application filed by election petitioner.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 in this application has stated that election petition was presented within the period of limitation but without affixing requisite court fee stamp on the petition and deficit court fee stamp of Rs. 15/ - was filed on 8.3.2000, much beyond the expiry of the period of limitation which expired on 21.11.99 and in this view of the matter election petition is fit to be dismissed summarily under section 86 (1) of the Act. Further case of respondent no. 1 is that election petitioner has made serious allegations of corrupt practices of various kinds such as undue influence, booth capturing and procuring help of gazetted officers including returning officer which are apparent from the pleading of the election petition including various annexures but the election petitioner has failed to give relevant facts and full particulars as required under the law by the mandatory provisions of section 83 of the Act and election petitioner has not given any extra affidavit prescribed under Form -25 read with section 83 of the Act and Rule 94A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 (in short Election Rules). Further case of respondent no. 1 is that the allegations regarding commission of irregularities and illegalities in the counting of ballot papers are vague, scandalous and vexatious and there is no document to support such allegations. So the entire allegation of commission of irregularities and illegalities in the counting of ballot papers is fit to be struck off from the pleading of election petition under Order 6, rule 16 of CPC. The further grievance of respondent no. 1 is that copy of election petition served on him is not a true copy of original election petition presented in this Court and there are many discrepancies betwen the two and such discrepancies have not only prejudiced respondent no. 1 but have also misled him. Prayer has been made for dismissing the election petition summarily as being not maintainable.

(3.) OPPOSING the prayer of respondent no. 1, the election petitioner in this rejoinder has stated that requirements of sections 81, 82. and 117 of the Act have been fully complied with by the election petitioner and about non -affixing requisite court fee stamp on the petition it is stated that the election petition was presented within the period ot limitation and election petitioner was granted time by this Court to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter and election petitioner complied this direction in time and in this view of the matter it cannot be said that election petition was not presented within the period of limitation. The further case of election petitioner is that he has not alleged any corrupt practice against any of the contesting candidates and/or election agents and therefore, no extra affidavit prescribed under Form -25 was required to be filed. The further case of election petitioner is that he has given full details of the material facts and particulars as per requirement under section 83 of the Act. About the alleged grievance of respondent no. 1 in respect of discrepancies in the original election petition and copy served on respondent no. 1 it has been stated that true copy of the election petition has been served on respondent no. 1 and only a vague, statement has been made that there are many discrepancies between the original election petition and its copy without citing a single instance of any discrepancy. According to the election petitioner, respondent no. 1 has entered his appearance only after publication of notice in the newspaper and he has not filed written statement in spite of taking time on two occasions and now he has filed the present application under consideration only to delay the disposal of election petition. Prayer has been made for dismissing the application of respondent no. 1.