MARKIO TADO Vs. TAKAM SORANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Muk Pertin, learned Counsel for the applicants and also heard Mr. B.L. Singh, learned Counsel, appearing for and on behalf of the opposite party/election Petitioner.

(2.) This is an application filed under Order VI, Rule 16 and order VII, Rule 11(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to strike out pleading as being unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and an abuse of process of the court and to reject the election petition on that count.

(3.) Mr. Pertin, learned Counsel appearing for the applicants submits that although the written statement has been filed by the applicant-returned candidate and the issues were framed and even the opposite party/election Petitioner has examined his witnesses to establish the allegations made in the election petition, this miscellaneous application has been filed to prevent the abuse of process of court and for rejection of the election petition without wasting the public time. The election petition mainly depends on ten documents marked as Annexure Nos. 1 to 10, amongst which, annexure-10 has been exhibited at paper exhibit No. 18. Paper exhibit No. 19 is a part of official records and both the paper exhibit Nos. 18 and 19 are in support of the returned candidate (present applicant). The documents annexed to the election petition and marked as annexure Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 were not exhibited while examining the witnesses of the election Petitioner and even the election Petitioner, opposite party admitted in his deposition that the signatures appeared on annexure Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 are not the signatures of the persons named therein. From such admission of the election Petitioner, it has been proved that the said annexures are fabricated and false documents and whatever allegations made in the election petition are also found to be fabricated and false and therefore, the statement made in all the paragraphs must go along with the said annexures. Similarly documents annexed to the election petition and marked as annexure Nos. 1, 2, 3. and 4 which have been exhibited as paper exhibit Nos. 8, 13, 10 and 14 respectively must also go inasmuch as the witnesses examined by the election Petitioner have not deposed in support of the same. Moreover, the election Petitioner who examined himself as PW10 and he himself admitted by saying that "did not lodge any complaint before the authorities concerned about he double enrollment because I did not know such double enrollment took place". Further the election Petitioner admitted in his deposition that the final electoral rolls were published by the authorities concerned before the election in question was held. The final electoral roll was published after disposal of the claims and objections and the period of such final disposal of the claims and objections. The said electoral rolls as published by the District Election Officer attained its finality and the election in question, was held on the basis of the said electoral rolls. Such electoral rolls cannot be questioned at this stage by the opposite party on the ground of alleged casting of votes by impersonation by some persons in certain polling stations. Taking this Court through the evidence of the election Petitioner and the relevant statement made in certain paragraphs of the election petition, Mr. Pertin, makes an attempt to persuade that the election Petitioner is trying to bring and make out new cases or improve his case through his witnesses although those allegations have not been made in the election petition thereby proceeding beyond the pleadings in the election petition. For example (1) there is no allegation in the election petition about the double enrollment of voters in two constituencies; (2) appointment of fake polling agents in polling booths; even in paper exhibit No. 15, i.e., first complaint and carrying arms by PPA party workers and supporters, and (3) presence of some persons in the army uniform with arms in polling booths have not been mentioned. These allegations were not made in the first complaint as well as in the election petition.