Election Petition properly filed with particulars of corrupt practices require trial. Appeal against rejection of application under order VII Rule 11 dismissed by Supreme Court.

Judgment dated 13th September 2024

Cause title : KIMNEO HAOKIP HANGSHING VS KENN RAIKHAN & ORS

Case No: SLP (C) 20580 of 2023

A Bench of Supreme Court Judges Hon'ble Justice SUDHANSHU DHULIA and Hon'ble Justice AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH dismissed the Special Leave petition filed against the order rejecting application under order VII Rule 11 in an election Petition filed by the Respondent containing a concise statement of material facts and particulars of corrupt practices which is alleged against the returned candidate. Cause of action has also been properly disclosed in the Election Petition. The issues involved in the Petition are triable issues, hence the appeal was dismissed.

Facts of the case are:

The appellant before the Supreme Court is a Member of Legislative Assembly and was elected from the 46-Saikul Assembly Constituency in the 12th General Elections to the Manipur Legislative Assembly, which were held in 2022.

The respondent, who was also a contestant from the same seat, filed an Election Petition before the High Court of Manipur
challenging the result of the election on the grounds that the appellant has not disclosed her assets in her nomination papers and that she had indulged in "corrupt practices" in the election. The appellant filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for rejection of the petition, which was dismissed. The application dismissed by the High Court on 05.07.2023 was under challenge before the Supreme Court.

Before the High Court, the appellant then moved an application under Order VII Rule 11 for rejection of the petition on
the grounds that it does not disclose any cause of action as it does not specify any corrupt practices alleged to have been committed by the appellant, nor is there any averment regarding concealment of her income/assets. Therefore, the Election Petition does not comply with the requirements of Section 83 of RPA and ought to be dismissed at the threshold.

The High Court vide the impugned order held that whether the appellant had any income or not and whether he had given a
wrong declaration at the time of his nomination needs to be looked into in trial for which evidence has to be led by the parties and examined by the Court. The petition cannot be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 application. Consequently, the application under Order VII Rule 11 filed by the appellant was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said order the appellant filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Summary of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is:

12. In view of the reasons stated above, we see no reason to interfere with the finding of the High Court of Manipur that the Election Petition discloses a cause of action and that there is substantial compliance of the requirements provided under provisions of RPA and thus the petition cannot be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

13. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed."

 

Download Judgment dated 13th September 2024 in KIMNEO HAOKIP HANGSHING VS KENN RAIKHAN & ORS, SLP (C) 20580 of 2023.

 

Latest Supreme Court Judgments

Stamp Duty should be paid while registering Agreement to Sell which shows transfer of physical possession of property, Supreme Court, Appeal dismissed
Prosecution failed to place any evidence to prove suppression of material information, accused acquitted by the Supreme Court, in a case of holding a second passport
Supreme Court set aside the Judgment of High Court acquitting the accused who stored and watched child pornography on mobile phone.
Independent review by authority recommending and granting sanction are necessary aspects of compliance with Section 45 of the UAPA
Accused in a dowry death case acquitted by Supreme Court as necessary ingredients have not been proved beyond reasonable doubt .
Supreme Court granted bail Mr. Arvind Kejriwal in CBI case in connection with the alleged liquor excise policy case filed by CBI. Separate Judgment.
FIR against illegal sex determination test quashed by supreme court as there was nothing to connect the accused with the offence except search and seizure documents
Election Petition properly filed with particulars of corrupt practices require trial. Appeal against rejection of application under order VII Rule 11 dismissed by Supreme Court
High Court was not right in dismissing the writ petitions on the ground of delay and laches - Supreme Court
Resignation withdrawn before delayed acceptance. Supreme Court directed for reinstatement of employee.
Criminal Appeal allowed and detention order quashed by the Supreme Court on the ground of delay in deciding representation given by the accused to detaining authorities
Offer of Possession without completion certificate is not valid Supreme Court orders full refund of amount paid by consumer with 9% interest p.a. and Rs. 15 lakh compensation
Supreme Court orders complete and fair investigation by CBI into the death of Assistant District Prosecution Officer, Dantewada
Lawyer did not conduct proper cross-examination is no ground to recall witness under 311 CrPC, Supreme Court.

 

Supreme Court order dated 20.08.2024, in Kolkatta rape and murder case of doctor, to formulate protocols governing issues in the health care sector and protection of Doctors and Healthcare staff
Writ Petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking direction for ensuring protection for doctors and health care professionals, Improved working conditions and safety working environment