Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) 26 of India r/w Sections 8 and 8-A of the RP Act, 1951. He submitted that if the allegations against the candidate are proved, he is elected his election will be set aside, but if he is not elected, then there will be no effect on the final outcome of the result, but he will be disqualified from contesting any elections for a period of six years from the date of conviction. He submitted that Election Commission was therefore not justified in recommending cancellation of the elections to 8-Vellore Parliamentary Constituency. 20. Mr.Sathish Parasaran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.11977 of 2019, further submitted that the reading of the recommendations would show that distribution of money to the voters has been prevented and therefore the purity of elections has not been disturbed. He also contended in any event, the Hon'ble President does not have the power to rescind the election. He submitted that if elections are countermanded/rescinded on the allegation of distribution of money, then it will amount to inserting to a new provision in the RP Act, 1951 after from Section 58 and 58-A. He further submitted that on the facts of the present case countermanding election is too drastic step. In the alternative, he contended that even if it is to be assumed that the Election Commission of India does have the http://www.judis.nic.in