Vs. Shri Shanti Lal Khoiwal  INSC 495 (3 April 1996)
K.Ramaswamy, K.Bharucha S.P. (J) Paripoornan, K.S.(J) Bharucha, J.
1996 AIR 1691 1996 SCC (5) 181 JT 1996 (5) 681 1996 SCALE (3)369
APPEAL NOS.8080 OF 1994 AND 6635 OF 1995.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.200 OF 1993 Jhamak Lal V. Dr. Laxminarayan Pande & Ors.
in respectful agreement with the judgment and order of our learned brother, K. Ramaswamy,
J. I would set out may reasons, briefly, thus:
question that must be posed, as indicated by this Court's previous decisions, is
: does the document purporting to be a true copy of the election petition
mislead in a material particular ? The "true copy" of the election
petition furnished by the appellant election (election petitioner) to the
respondent (the successful candidate) did not show that the appellant's
affidavit supporting his allegations of corrupt practice had been duly sworn or
affirmed. Where corrupt practice is alleged, the election petitioner must
support the allegation by making an affidavit in the format prescribed. An
affidavit must be sworn or affirmed in the manner required by law, or it is not
an affidavit. The document purporting to be a true copy of the election
petition furnished by the appellant to the respondent gave the impression that
the appellant's affidavit supporting his allegations of corrupt practice had
not been sworn or affirmed and was, therefore, no affidavit at all; it misled
in a material particular and its supply was, as the High Court held, fatal to
the election petition.