Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Manipur High Court

(Through Video Conference) vs Lorho S. Pfoze & Ors on 19 January, 2022

Author: Mv Muralidaran

Bench: Mv Muralidaran

 JOHN
 TELEN KOM                                                            Item No.29
 Digitally signed by
 JOHN TELEN KOM         IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
 Date: 2022.01.21                 AT IMPHAL
 09:20:06 +05'30'
                              El.Pet.No.1 of 2019

                          (Through video conference)

Houlim Shokhopao Mate @ Benjamin
                                                               .... Petitioner/s
                                   - Versus -

Lorho S. Pfoze & ors.

                                                             .... Respondent/s

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MV MURALIDARAN 19.01.2022 [1] Heard Mr. A. Mohendro, learned counsel for the election petitioner and Mr. H.S Paonam, learned counsel for the respondent No.1. [2] Mr. A. Mohendro, learned counsel for the petitioner represented that he has filed 9 (nine) suggested issues on 04.12.2021 and he prayed that the suggested issues No. 2,3,4,5,7,8 & 9 may be framed. [3] Mr.H.S.Paonam, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 represented that he has represented that he has filed 8(eight) suggested issues on 22.12.2021. He further represented that the suggested issues seeking for framing by the learned counsel for the election petitioner may be framed in this case and he has also not made any objection for the same. [4] |Therefore, after hearing the arguments of both the counsels and gone through the entire records, I am inclined to frame the following issues.

(a) Whether the Affidavit in Form 26 filed under Rule 4A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 by the Respondent No.1 suffers from defects of substantial character and if it is suffered from defects, then whether it would affect the result the election of 2-Outer Manipur(ST) Parliamentary Constituency to the 17 th Lok Sabha, 2019?
(b) Whether the Affidavit in form 26 dated 21/03/2019 along with the Nomination paper was submitted by the respondent No.1 before the Returning Officer, 2-Outer Manipur (ST) Parliamentary Constituency to the 17th Lok Sabha, 2019?
(c) Whether the Affidavit in Form 26 dated 21/03/2019 along with the Nomination paper was uploaded by the Official of the Election Commission of India in its website www.ceomanipur.nic.in. for accessing the same by the voters/Electors or general public?
(d) Whether the respondent No.1 has failed to strictly follow the instructions of the Election Commission of India in relation to separate Bank, election expenditure etc.? if failed what is its effect?
(e) Whether the respondent No.1 or his authorized agent in the election committed corrupt practice as defined under Section 123(6) of the Representation of the People's Act, 1951?

If yes, is it materially affected the result of the election of 2-Outer Manipur (ST) Parliamentary Constituency to the 17 th Lok Sabha, 2019?

(f) Whether the election of the Respondent No.1 as the returned candidate from 2-Outer Manipur Parliamentary Constituency in the General Election to the 17 th Lok Sabha, 2019 is liable to be declared null and void?

(g) Whether the Election petitioner is entitled to be declared as the returned candidate of 2-Outer Manipur Parliamentary Constituency in the 17 th Lok Sabha Eelction 2019? [5] In view of the issues framed by this Court in the election petition today, both the parties are directed to furnish their list of witnesses on their respective sides on or before 28.02.2022. Both the parties are permitted to file their original documents or certified copy of documents in which they already filed Xerox copies in this case.

   [6]          Post this matter on 28.02.2022.


   [7]          Registry is directed to delete the name of Mr.I. Lalitkumar,

learned senior counsel in the cause list and print the name of Mr.H.S Paonam, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.1. [8] Registry is directed to issue copy of this order to both the parties to their Whapsapp/e-mail.

JUDGE John Kom