https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195456 An election petition alleging corrupt practice under section 123(7) failed because the pleadings were sufficiently clear to meet the challenge of vagueness, and the verification substantially complied with the statutory requirements, so no prejudice was shown. The Court further held that corrupt practice, being quasi-criminal, must be proved by clear and cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable alternative hypothesis. On the facts, the meeting was called on the Bishop's initiative, the police officer's presence was explained, and the evidence did not reliably show that he acted at the candidate's instance. The allegation that the candidate procured the officer's services was therefore not proved. en-us Tue, 12 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Oct 2017 14:55:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195456 An election petition alleging corrupt practice under section 123(7) failed because the pleadings were sufficiently clear to meet the challenge of vagueness, and the verification substantially complied with the statutory requirements, so no prejudice was shown. The Court further held that corrupt practice, being quasi-criminal, must be proved by clear and cogent evidence beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable alternative hypothesis. On the facts, the meeting was called on the Bishop's initiative, the police officer's presence was explained, and the evidence did not reliably show that he acted at the candidate's instance. The allegation that the candidate procured the officer's services was therefore not proved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 12 Sep 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195456