Election Petition. Amendment to introduce “material facts” after the expiry of limitation to file election petition not permissible. Only “amplificatory particulars” can be added. Karnataka High Court.

Firdous Parveez Taj vs Yasmin Taj. Writ Petition 11100/2020 decided on 22 January 2021.

Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/360729/1/WP11100-20-22-01-2021.pdf

Relevant paragraphs: It is basic to the law of elections that in a democracy, the mandate of people as expressed at the hustings must prevail and be respected; that is why the election of a successful candidate is not readily upset for askance; a heavy onus lies on the petitioner who seeks to void the election, to  make out a clear case, both in terms  of pleadings & proof; an election petition and a suit proceeding differ from each other in their nature & scope;  it is a settled position of law that all “material facts” must be pleaded by the party in support of the case  set up by  him for voiding an election; ordinarily, if some facts inadvertently or otherwise  are not pleaded can be loaded  to the pleadings by amendment provided that, leave therefor is sought before the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed for filing the petition; this again is subject to all just exceptions; the underlying object of this  is to enable the victorious candidate, to know the specific case which he has to meet.

Right to amend the pleadings even after the limitation period has expired avails in the realm of election law although it’s exercise is conditioned by  the  factors  such as nature & substance of amendment,  delay  & latches, the stage of proceedings & the like, is not much in dispute since the provisions of CPC are made mutatis mutadis applicable to the trial of election petitions vide Sec.24 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964; where challenge is laid on the  ground of corrupt practice, the  right to amend the pleadings is limited to introducing “amplificatory particulars” of a corrupt practice not previously averred in the petition but does not extend to introducing the material facts, as such; by the subject amendment the respondent seeks to introduce the details  of undisclosed properties to the petition, which are already stated in great details in the List of Documents which accompanied the original petition from the day one; even copies of documents were also filed; both the sides having understood what is what, accordingly have drawn  the battle lines; that being the position, it cannot be gainsaid that the amendment introduces the material facts, when it only amplifies of what are there already.

Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.