High Court · 2012

8. Referring to paragraphs 15 and 16 of the election petition Mr. A garwal submits that the election petition also deserves to be dismissed for non furnishing of the documents as mentioned in the said paragraphs of the election petition, as those documents form integral part of the election petition. It is the contention of the learned counsel that the complaints both dated 4.4.2011, o ne filed with the officer-in-charge of the police station and the other before t he District Election Officer, being the documents filed by the opposite party at the earliest point of time alleging booth capturing, those documents form integ ral part of the election petition and as such are required to be furnished to th e petitioner, so that he is not handicapped to counter the allegation effectivel y in the written statement and he is not caught by surprise at a subsequent stag e of the proceeding. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that as the petitio ner is deprived from the contents of the said documents by non furnishing the co pies thereof the election petition deserves to be dismissed.

9. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel that the plead ings in paragraph 14 of the election petition is unnecessary and scandalous as i t does not contain any allegation of corrupt practice by the returned candidate and as such the pleadings in the said paragraph of the election petition needs t o be strike out in view of the provisions contained in Order 6 Rule 16 of the CP C.

10. Mr. Agarwal the learned counsel in support of his contention has placed reliance on the following decisions of the Apex Court: -