Venkataramiah, J. - (1.) The above petition is filed by the petitioner, Shri Mithilesh Kumar under the provisions of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952 (Act No. 31 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') calling in question the validity of the election of Shri R. Venkataraman, the 1st respondent herein as the President of India at the election held in July, 1987 for electing the President of India and praying for a declaration that he is the successful candidate at that election. There were three candidates at the election, namely, Shri R. Venkataraman respondent No. 1, Shri V. R. Krishna lyer respondent No. 2 and Shri Mithilesh Kumar - the petitioner. The result of the election was declared on 16-7-1987 by the Returning Officer for Presidential Election 1987 - respondent No. 4, declaring Shri R. Venkataraman - respondent No. 1 as the President of India.
(2.) The Act was passed in the year 1952 for the purpose of regulating certain matters relating to or connected with the elections to the offices of the President and the VicePresident of India. Part II of the Act contains the provisions relating to the conduct of Presidential and Vice-Presidential elections and Part III of the Act sets out the provisions relating to the settlement of disputes regarding elections to the offices of the President and the Vice-President of India. Section 14 of the Act provides that no election should be called in question except by presenting an election petition to the authority specified in sub-see. (2) and the authority having jurisdiction to try an election petition under the Act is specified as the Supreme Court of India by sub-see. (2). Sub-section (3) of S. 14 of the Act requires that an election petition should be presented to the Supreme Court of India in accordance with the provisions of Part III of the Act and of the rules made by the Supreme Court of India under Art. 145 of the Constitution. Order XXXIX of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') made under Art. 145 of the Constitution and all other powers enabling it in this behalf by the Supreme Court of India contains the provisions relating to the election petitions filed under Part III of the Act. Section 14-A of the Act provides that an election petition calling in question an election may be presented on one or more of the grounds specified in sub-sec. (1) of S. 18 and S. 19 to the Supreme Court by any candidate at such election or in the case of Presidential election, by twenty or more electors joined together as petitioners and in the case of Vice-Presidential election, by ten or more electors joined as petitioners. Such petition may be presented at any time after the date of the publication of the declaration containing the name of the elected. candidate at the election under S. 12 of the Act but not later than thirty days from the date of such publication. Section 15 of the Act provides that subject to the provisions of Part III of the Act rules made by the Supreme Court of India under Art. 145 of the Constitution may regulate the form of election petitions, the manner in which they are to be presented, the persons who are to be made parties thereto, the procedure to be adopted in connection therewith and the circumstances in which petitions are to abate and to be withdrawn and in which new petitioners may be substituted and may require security to be given for costs. Rule 3 of Order XXXIX of the Rules prescribes that a court-fee stamp of the value of rupees two hundred and fifty shall be paid on the election petition and the election petition will be signed by the petitioner or petitioners, it they are more than one, or a duly authorised advocate-on-record on his or their behalf. Rule 4 of Order XXXIX of the Rules provides that the petition shall be divided into paragraphs, numbered consecutively, each paragraph being confined to a distinct portion of the subject, and shall be printed or typed legibly on one side of standard petition-paper, demy-foolscap size or of the size of 29.7 cm. x 21 cm. or on paper of equally superior quality. Rule 5 of Order XXXIX of the Rules requires that the petition shall state the right of the petitioner under the Act to petition the Court and briefly set forth the facts and grounds relied on by him to sustain the reliefs claimed by him. The allegations of fact contained in the petition shall be verified by an affidavit to be made personally by the petitioner or by one of the petitioners, if there are more than one as provided under Rule 6 of Order XXXIX of the Rules. The grounds on which the election of the returned candidate at the Presidential or the Vice-Presidential election can be declared void are set out in S. 18 of the Act. Section 18 of the Act reads thus:- "18(1). If the Supreme Court is of opinion,- (a) that the offence of bribery or undue influence at the election has been committed by the returned candidate or by any person with the consent of the returned candidate; or (b) that the result of the election has been materially affected- (i) by the improper reception or refusal of a vote; or (ii) by any non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of this Act or of any rules or orders made under this Act; or (iii) by reason of the fact that the nomination of any candidate (other than the successful candidate), who has not withdrawn his candidature, has been wrongly accepted; or (c) that the nomination of any candidate has been wrongly rejected or the nomination of the successful candidate has been wrongly accepted; the Supreme Court shall declare the election of the returned candidate to be void. (2) For the purposes of this section, the offences of bribery and undue influence at an election have the same meaning as in Chapter IXA of the Indian Penal Code."
(3.) Section 19 of the Act sets out the grounds for which a candidate other than the returned candidate may be declared to have been elected. Section 19 of the Act reads thus: "19. Grounds for which a candidate other than the returned candidate may be declared to have been elected. If any person who has lodged an election petition has, in addition to calling in question the election of the returned candidate, claimed a declaration that he himself or any other candidate has been duly elected and the Supreme Court is of opinion that in fact the petitioner or such other candidate received a majority of the valid votes, the Supreme Court shall, after declaring the election of the returned candidate to be void, declare the petitioner or such other candidate, as the case may be, to have been duly elected: Provided that the petitioner or such other candidate shall not be declared to be duly elected if it is proved that the election of such candidate would have been void if he had been the returned candidate and a petition had been presented calling in question his election.";