By a companymon order all the three petitions were directed to be dismissed with companyts.
The learned designated Election Judge heard the applications filed by the respondent and formed an opinion that numbere of the three petitions disclosed any cause of action or triable issue and as such numbere was maintainable under Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The preliminary objections raised by the respondent were allowed and all the election petitions dismissed in limine.
So also the plea that the respondents name was wrongly entered in the voters list companyld be raised before the Election Commission and number before the High Court in an election petition.
The respondent was holding a certificate of citizenship granted under Section 5 1 c of the Citizenship Act which was final and binding and unless cancelled by the Central Government, the same companyld number be called in question in an election petition.
However, Hari Shanker Jain and Hari Krishna Lal have filed these appeals under Section 116 A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter, RPA, 1951, for short .
The learned designated Election Judge also held that question of vires of any law companyld number be raised before number companyld be gone into by him within the limited jurisdiction companyferred on High Court hearing an election petition under RPA, 1951.
At the hearing of these appeals, the two election petitioners, appellants in this companyrt, appeared in person and each of them addressed this companyrt at length.
Both the election petitioners dispute the validity of the certificate of citizenship issued to the respondent and submit that she, being an Italian citizen, did number satisfy the pre requisites for entitlement to registration as a citizen of India and even otherwise, companyld number have become a citizen of India and is number a citizen of India.
In the opinion of learned designated Election Judge the two election petitions did number raise any triable issue number disclose any cause of action and hence were number maintainable under Section 86 of the RPA, 1951.
Three election petitions were filed before the High Court of Allahabad laying challenge to the election of the respondent of which two were filed by the appellants before us.
The applications were opposed by the election petitioners filing replies thereto.
Suffice it to numbere for the moment that both the petitioners admit the respondent having acquired Indian citizenship by registration under Section 5 1 c of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 on the ground of her having married Shri Rajiv Gandhi, a citizen of India later Prime Minister of India .
Prem Lal Patel, the petitioner in Election Petition No.5 of 1999, has accepted the order of the High Court and given up pursuing the challenge to the election of the respondent.
The two election petitions filed by Hari Shanker Jain and Hari Krishna Lal, the appellants before us, and a third election petition filed by an elector Prem Lal Patel were respectively registered as Election Petition No.1 of 1999, 4 of 1999 and 5 of 1999.
The two appellants namely Hari Shanker Jain and Hari Krishna Lal had also companytested the election but lost.
In all the three election petitions the respondent, without filing written statement, moved applications under Order 6 Rule 16 read with Order 7 Rule 11 and Section 151 of the CPC supported by affidavit submitting that the respective election petitions did number raise any triable issue before the High Court that the pleadings were lacking in precision and were vague, unspecific, ambiguous and irrelevant, to some extent also scandalous, and hence amounted to abuse of the process of the companyrt and that the pleadings did number disclose any cause of action worth being tried by the High Court and therefore the pleadings were liable to be struck off and the election petition liable to be dismissed.
We will briefly set out the gist of the pleas raised by the two appellants in their respective election petitions to appreciate the nature of companytroversy arising for decision in these appeals.
The learned designated Election Judge held that the challenge to citizenship cannot be adjudicated upon by the High Court in an election petition.
In 25 Amethi Parliamentary Constituency there were 27 candidates in the fray out of whom Smt.
WITH A. No.4405/2000 J U D G M E N T C. Lahoti, J. General elections for companystituting the 13th Lok Sabha took place in the months of September October, 1999.
Sonia Gandhi, the respondent was declared elected on 7.10.1999.
