Summary
An election petition before the Andhra Pradesh High Court challenged the returned candidate's election on two grounds: improper acceptance of his nomination because of defects in the Form-26 affidavit, and improper reception and rejection of votes. After the limitation period, the petitioner was allowed to amend to plead that the candidate had not disclosed a pending criminal case in which charges were framed. The candidate argued that this introduced a new allegation of corrupt practice, barred by Section 86(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal. No corrupt practice had been pleaded or was sought to be pleaded. The amendment only added a further reason why the nomination should not have been accepted, so it was governed by Section 87 and Order VI Rule 17 CPC rather than Section 86(5).
Issues
- Whether an amendment to an election petition, pleading non-disclosure of a pending criminal case in the nomination affidavit, introduced a new ground of corrupt practice barred by Section 86(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 after the limitation period.
Provisions considered
- Section 86(5), Representation of the People Act, 1951The bar on introducing particulars of a corrupt practice not previously alleged did not apply because the petition neither pleaded nor sought to plead corrupt practice. (¶¶ 15, 17, 18)
- Sections 87 and 100(1)(d)(i), Representation of the People Act, 1951Amendment of a petition not based on corrupt practice is governed by the CPC through Section 87; the new averments added a further reason for improper acceptance of nomination. (¶¶ 13, 17, 18)
- Section 33A, Representation of the People Act, 1951Disclosure of pending cases with framed charges for offences punishable with two years or more was the requirement whose non-compliance the amendment pleaded. (¶¶ 7, 15)
- Order VI Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Applies to election petitions through Section 87, subject to the restrictions of Section 86(5) only where corrupt practice is involved. (¶ 17)
Held
- Where an election petition does not rest on corrupt practice, amendment is considered under Section 87 and Order VI Rule 17 CPC, outside the restriction in Section 86(5). (¶¶ 17, 18)
- Pleading non-disclosure of a pending criminal case as a further reason why the nomination should have been rejected did not introduce a new cause of action or change the character of a petition already founded on improper acceptance of nomination; the amendment was rightly allowed. (¶ 18)
- No opinion was expressed on the merits of the amended pleading or of the election petition. (¶ 20)
Result
Appeal dismissed; the High Court's order allowing amendment of the election petition upheld.