Orissa High Court Rejects Election Challenge Over Facebook EVM Selfie
The Orissa High Court has firmly dismissed a plea contesting the election victory of a candidate from the Rourkela legislative constituency, emphasizing that an election petition is a serious legal matter that cannot be treated lightly or exploited for vexatious purposes. In a significant ruling, the court underscored the necessity for strict adherence to procedural requirements in election disputes.
Court's Stance on Corrupt Practice Allegations
Justice Sashikant Mishra presided over the case, which involved an election petition filed under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The petitioner argued that posting a "selfie" on Facebook featuring an open Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machine during the poll period amounted to a corrupt practice under Section 123 of the Act. However, the court found the allegations lacking in substance.
The court held that the election petition failed to plead how the alleged acts materially affected the election outcome, which is an essential condition for invoking corrupt practice grounds. The order explicitly stated that the Facebook photographs, though integral to the pleading, were not included in the copy of the petition served to the winning candidate, rendering them inadmissible as supplementary evidence.
Critical Deficiencies in the Petition
The High Court highlighted several key deficiencies in the election petition:
- The petition did not disclose the official position or capacity of the individual allegedly deployed on election duty, nor any nexus between that person and the winning candidate.
- It was conspicuously silent on details such as the date, time, and place where the photographs were taken, and lacked verification on whether they occurred before, during, or after polling.
- The pleadings were described as vague, bald, and imprecise, lacking material facts and particulars required under the RP Act.
The court reiterated that an election petition must strictly comply with the requirement of stating material facts, and any omissions or defects can be fatal to its validity. Consequently, the petition was dismissed without the need to examine other grounds raised.
Background of the Election Dispute
The election petition sought to declare the election of the winning candidate from the 12-Rourkela Assembly Constituency to the Odisha State Legislative Assembly as void and to order a re-election. It was based on two principal grounds: improper acceptance of nomination by the returning officer and corrupt practice involving the Facebook selfie, which allegedly compromised the secrecy and sanctity of the voting process.
In response, the winning candidate filed a written statement and an application, contending that the copy of the election petition did not constitute a true copy under the RP Act and that the pleadings were insufficient to disclose a complete cause of action. The court agreed, allowing the winning candidate's plea and dismissing the election petition.
This ruling reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding the integrity of election laws while ensuring that petitions are grounded in concrete evidence and procedural rigor.
