In Brief
In this appeal, the Supreme Court set aside a High Court's rejection of a returned candidate's application to dismiss an election petition on procedural grounds. The election petitioner had challenged the appellant's election to the Assam Legislative Assembly (Sonai Constituency), alleging corrupt practices and improper acceptance of nomination based on false statements and suppression of facts regarding the appellant's educational qualification, bank loans, and provident fund dues. The Court held that the election petition lacked the mandatory concise statement of material facts required by Section 83(1)(a) of the Representation of the People's Act, 1951, and failed to plead full particulars of alleged corrupt practice as required by Section 83(1)(b). The Court affirmed that allegations of non-disclosure or false statements do not automatically constitute the corrupt practice of undue influence under Section 123(2) unless they show direct or indirect interference with the free exercise of electoral rights. The appeal was allowed and the election petition was dismissed at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.