M. Prithviraj @ Prithiviraj Singh vs P. Sharatchandra Singh & Anr

Heard Mr. S. Biswajit, learned counsel for the election petitioner. Also heard Mr. H. Lenin, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

After hearing the parties, the following issues are framed :

“1. Whether the respondent No. 1, Mr. Pukhrem Sharatchandra Singh filed a false affidavit (Form 26 Rule IV-A) along with his nomination paper

in as much as the Respondent No. 1 has failed to disclose in column 7(B) of the affidavit i.e. the immovable assets of the Respondent No. 1’s

spouse mentioned in para No. 1 & 4 in Misc. Case (EP) No. 26 of 2017 and its relevant annexures annexed therein;

Whether the Respondent No. 1 failed to disclose in respect of his immovable property being Shop Unit No. 53 at Shop-cum-residential Complex,

Lamphelpat, Imphal under Planning and Development Authority, Manipur as explained in para No. 4 of the Misc. Application being MC(EP) No. 5 of

2018 and its relevant annexures annexed therein in column 7 (B) of his affidavit (Form No. 26 Rule IV-A) filed along with his nomination paper;

Whether the RO of 27-Moirang A/C to the 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly Election, 2017 improperly accepted the nomination paper of

respondent No. 1;

Whether improper acceptance of the nomination of the Respondent No. 1 by the RO of the 27-Moirang A/C to the 11th Manipur Legislative

Assembly Election, 2017 has materially affected the election of the petitioner as in the event of rejecting the nomination of the Respondent No. 1, the

election petitioner would have been the return candidate from 27-Moirang A/C to the 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly Election, 2017;

Whether the improper acceptance of the nomination paper of the Respondent No. 1 by the RO of the 27-Moirang A/C to the 11th Manipur

Legislative Assembly Election, 2017 amounts to declaring the election of the Respondent No. 1 as void:

Whether large scale bribery and corrupt practices were resorted by the election petitioner and his supporters on 1st March, 2017 during the course

of Public rally/meeting organized in and around Kwakta Public Ground under Moirang Assembly Constituency or not?

Whether rampant distribution of money by Indian National Congress through its Chairman of Kwakta Municipal Council namely Md. Maheruddin

@ Nahayai, with the consent of the election petitioner to the large number of voters on 1st March, 2017 in and around Kwakta Public Ground under

Moirang Assembly Constituency or not?

Whether the distribution of money by the Chairperson of Kwakta Municipal Council to the large member of voters who were brandishing INC

Party Flags was caught red- handed on camera and widely circulated in Social Media throughout the State or not?

Whether there was a direction dated 02-03-2017 issued by the office of Chief Electoral Officer, Manipur under Election Commission of India,

thereby directing the Returning Officer of 27-Moirang Assembly Constituency to register FIR against the election petitioner for indulging in large scale

bribery and corrupt practice and also violation of Model Code of Conduct or not?

Whether the election agent of the Restpondent No. 1 has filed complaint dated 02-03-2017 to the Election Commission of India, in regards to

distribution of money to INC voter by the Chairperson of Kwakta Municipal Council on behalf of the election petitioner or not?

Whether FIR NO. 26(3) 2017 MRG-PS U/s 171(E) IPC and 125 of RP Act, 1951 was registered by the Moirang Police Station against the

election petitioner for distributing money to voters and creating enmity among classes of people or not?

Whether the election petitioner has given false Affidavit dated 14/02/2017 under Form 26, that there is no arrear on any dues to be paid towards

rent for the accommodation or any arrear to the agency providing electricity, water, Quarter, Telephone in respect of the Government accommodation

allotted to him at Type-VII/I along Dimapur-Imphal Road for the last ten years?

Whether the election petitioner has disclose the outstanding due of Rs. 3,16,793/- (Rupees three lakhs sixteen thousand seven hundred ninety

three) towards the connection of No. 5-CQ-50A as on 11/02/2017 in his affidavit dated 14/02/2017 under Form 26 or not?

Whether the election petitioner has disclosed the outstanding arrear of Rs. 1,01,462/- (Rs. One lakh one thousand four hundred sixty two) as on

11/02/2017 for the electric connection No. 5-CQ-50B which stand in his name has been disclosed in his Affidavit dated 14/02/2017 under Form 26 or

not?

Whether the present election petition suffers from deficiency of material facts on which the petitioner relies?

Whether the petitioner set-forth full particulars of any corrupt parties or any ground specified of Section 100 and Section 101 to the High Court by

any candidate at such election or any elector committed by present respondent No. 1 and whether the election petitioner disclosed any date and place

commission of such practice?

Whether the relief claimed by the election petitioner in the present election petition is entitled or not?

Whether the Election Petition of the petitioner is liable to be dismissed as per the content and language assigned in the gift deed at Annexure A/4

as it pertains to the gift transaction between one P.S Koloi and his wife Hemam Shyama Devi; and Respondent No. 1 has nothing to do with the said

gift deed?

Whether there is a presumption under law regarding the gift deed under Annexure A/4 between one P.S Koloi and his wife Hemam Shyama Devi,

thereby only proving that the said gift deed has nothing to do with the Respondent No. 1?

Whether the election petitioner is entitled to be declared as returned candidate in view of the Recrimination Petition filed by the Respondent No. 1

in the Election Petition No. 1 of 2017 under section 97 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951?

Whether any corrupt practice has been committed by the election petitioner or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of

Election Petitioner or his election agent?

Whether any nomination has been improperly accepted?

Whether the result of the election, in so far as it concerns a returned candidate, has been materially affected by the improper acceptance or any

nomination paper or any non-compliance with the provisions of the Constitution or of this Act or of any rules or orders made under the Representation

of Peoples Act, 1951 shall declare the election of the returned candidate to be void?

Whether the votes secured by the election petitioner are the valid vote or not?

Whether the election petitioner has committed any corrupt practice in numerated envisage in Section 123?

Whether the election petitioner has committed any electoral offences under Chapter III of the Representation of People Act, 1951?

Whether the present election petition is liable to be dismissed with heavy cost?â€​

Parties are also directed to furnish their list of witnesses by the next returnable date.

List the matters again on 6th April, 2021.