LexKARIM UDDIN BARBHUIYA versus AMINUL HAQUE LASKAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 4 S.C.R. 523 : 2024 INSC 282 Karim Uddin Barbhuiya v. Aminul Haque Laskar & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 6282 of 2023) 08 April 2024 [Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi*, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether an election petition alleging corrupt practice in the nature of undue influence and alleging improper acceptance of nomination is to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC when material facts as required under s. 83 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (RP Act) are not pleaded and where no grounds as contemplated under s. 100 RP Act are made out. Headnotes Representation of People Act, 1951 – Election petition filed under ss. 100(1)(b) and 100(1)(d)(i) RP Act to declare election of Appellant void – Allegation raised regarding false statement, suppression and misrepresentation of facts regarding educational qualification and suppression of fact regarding financial liability – Same amounting to corrupt practice u/s. 100(1)(b) RP Act – Further alleging improper acceptance of nomination u/s. 100(1)(d)(i) RP Act – Application filed by Appellant under Order VII Rule 11 CPC r/w s. 87 RP Act for rejection of petition – High Court dismissed said application. Held: RP Act is self-contained code – Any rights claimed in relation to election, election dispute must be found therein – If allegations in petition do not set out grounds contemplated by s. 100 RP Act and do not conform to requirement of ss. 81 and 83 RP Act, election petition liable to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC – Pleadings to be precise, specific, unambiguous – Material facts to be pleaded to show cause of action – When alleging corrupt practice in nature of undue influence, pleadings must state full particulars as required u/s. 83(1)(b) RP Act regarding direct or indirect interference or attempt to interfere by candidate, with free exercise of electoral right as required u/s. 123(2) RP Act – When alleging improper acceptance of nomination, particulars showing how such improper acceptance materially affected result 524 [2024] 4 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports of election must be present – Omission of single material fact leading to incomplete cause of action would entail rejection of election petition under Order VII Rule 11 CPC r/w ss. 83 and 87 RP Act. [Paras 12-15, 19-24] Case Law Cited Bhagwati Prasad Dixit ‘Ghorewala’ v. Rajeev Gandhi [1986] 2 SCR 823 : [1986] 4 SCC 78; Dhartipakar Madan Lal Agarwal v. Rajiv Gandhi [1987] 3 SCR 369 : [1987] Supp SCC 93; Laxmi Narayan Nayak v. Ramratan Chaturvedi & Ors [1989] Supp. 2 SCR 581 : [1990] 2 SCC 173; Kanimozhi Karunanidhi v. A. Santhana Kumar & Ors [2023] 4 SCR 798 : 2023 SCC Online SC 573; Azhar Hussain v. Rajiv Gandh [1986] 2 SCR 782 : [1986] Supp. SCC 315; Samant N. Balkrishna & Anr. v. George Fernandez & Ors. [1969] 3 SCR 603 : [1969] 3 SCC 238; Shri Udhav Singh v. Madhav Rao Scindia [1976] 2 SCR 246 : [1977] 1 SCC 511 - relied on. List of Acts The Representation of the People’s Act, 1951; The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. List of Keywords Corrupt practice; Undue influence; Improper acceptance of nomination; Material facts not pleaded in election petition; Incomplete cause of action; Rejection of election petition. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6282 of 2023 From the Judgment and Order dated 26.04.2023 of the Gauhati High Court in IA(C) No. 1278 of 2021 Appearances for Parties Kapil Sibal, Dr. Menaka Guruswamy, Sr. Advs., Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Mustafa Khaddam Hussain, Mohammad Nizamuddin Pasha, Ms. Rupali Samuel, Ibad Mushtaq, Ms. Akanksha Rai, Utkarsh Pratap, Lavkesh Bhambhani, Harshvardhan Thakur, Ms. Gurneet Kaur, Advs. for the Appellant. [2024] 4 S.C.R. 525 Karim Uddin Barbhuiya v. Aminul Haque Laskar & Ors. Jaideep Gupta, Dilip Majumder, Sr. Advs., Adeel Ahmed, Abdur Razzaque Bhuyan, Ms. Racheeta Chawla, Ms. Sana Parveen, Ms. Anupama Gupta, Ms. Riya Dutta, Piyush Sachdeva, Md Gouse Muddin Khan, Raja Chatterjee, Abhaya Nath Das, Yogendra Kumar Verma, B C Bhatt, Ms. Beena, Budha Deo Prasad, Sandeep Kumar, V K Shukla, Mrs. Leelawati Suman, Satish Kumar, Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Bela M. Trivedi, J. 1. The instant Appeal filed by the appellant - Karim Uddin Barbhuiya (Original Respondent No. 1) is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the Gauhati High Court at Gu
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.