Corrupt practice in election petitions requires full particulars, proper affidavit support, and strict proof; defective pleadings failed here.

An election petition alleging corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 must plead full material particulars, disclose the source of information with clarity, and be supported by a proper affidavit distinguishing personal knowledge from information. Because the allegation is quasi-criminal, it must be proved by clear, cogent and reliable evidence, not suspicion or conjecture. On the record, the pleadings and verification were defective and the evidence did not establish that the returned candidate wrote, directed, or produced the video cassette, or that the conduct attracted Section 123(3) or Section 123(3A). The challenge therefore failed and the election petition was not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the election petition alleging corrupt practice under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 was maintainable and proved in view of the pleadings, verification, affidavit and evidence on record.

Analysis: Allegations of corrupt practice in an election petition must be pleaded with full material particulars and supported by a proper affidavit in the prescribed form. The charge is quasi-criminal in nature, so it must be proved by clear, cogent and reliable evidence and not by suspicion or conjecture. The petition here lacked sufficient particulars, did not disclose the source of information with clarity, and the verification and affidavit were defective because they did not distinguish between matters of personal knowledge and information. On the evidence, the alleged role of the returned candidate in writing, directing or producing the video cassette was not established with the standard of proof required. The material also did not establish the requisite appeal on religious grounds or promotion of enmity or hatred so as to attract Section 123(3) or Section 123(3A).

Conclusion: The election petition was not sustainable and the charge of corrupt practice was not proved. The findings against the returned candidate could not be upheld.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the election failed, and the dismissal of the election petition was affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: An election petition alleging corrupt practice must contain complete material particulars and a proper supporting affidavit, and the allegation must be proved by strict, reliable evidence meeting a quasi-criminal standard of proof; suspicion or defective pleading cannot sustain the election being set aside.

---