https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157287 A noticee under Section 99 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 has an independent right to contest every essential ingredient of the alleged corrupt practice and to adduce evidence in defence. The written statement in this matter was read as denying invitation, presence, connection with the meeting and consent, so no implied admission could be inferred; refusal to allow that defence vitiated the inquiry. The alleged corrupt practice based on Pramod Mahajan's speech was also not proved, because the manifesto was not pleaded as the basis of liability, could not by itself establish the charge, and the evidence did not legally prove an appeal on religious grounds or promotion of enmity. The election could not be voided on those findings. en-us Mon, 11 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jul 2014 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157287 A noticee under Section 99 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 has an independent right to contest every essential ingredient of the alleged corrupt practice and to adduce evidence in defence. The written statement in this matter was read as denying invitation, presence, connection with the meeting and consent, so no implied admission could be inferred; refusal to allow that defence vitiated the inquiry. The alleged corrupt practice based on Pramod Mahajan's speech was also not proved, because the manifesto was not pleaded as the basis of liability, could not by itself establish the charge, and the evidence did not legally prove an appeal on religious grounds or promotion of enmity. The election could not be voided on those findings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157287