SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.R. DAS, C.J.I., BHAGWATI, S. IMAM, S.K. DAS, KAPUR, GAJENDRAGADKAR AND SARKAR, JJ.
Dr. Narayan Bhaskar Khare, Petitioner
Versus
Election Commission of India, Respondent.
Pt. Ram Nath Kalia, Petitioner
Versus
Election Commission of India and another, Respondents.
Petns. Nos. 63 and 64 of 1957 (with application for Ex-parte Stay).
Petn. No. 63 of 1957.
Petn. No. 64 of 1957.
3rd May, 1957.
Advocates appeared
M/s R. V. S. Mani and T. R. V. Sastri, Advocates (in Petn. No. 63 of 1957) and Mr. R. Patnaik Advocate (in Petn. No. 64 of 1957), for Petitioners; Mr. M.C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India, M/s. G.N. Joshi, Porus A. Mehta and R.H. Dhebar, Advocates (with him), for Respondents (Caveators) (in both petitions).
-held, inquiry is therefore to be made after completion of election, i.e. after a candidate is declared as elected as President or Vice President.
-held, Art. 71(3) authorises Parliament to make law for regulating any matter ‘relating to or connected with, the election’ of a President or Vice-President. The language used are similar to those in Article 327 and the Article confers equally wide power to cover matters relating to or connected with any stage of election process.
-see decision in Dr. N.B. Khare v. Election Commission, of India, AIR 1957 SC 694=1957 SCJ 663=1957 SCA 953.
Judgement
S. R. DAS CJI. - The petitioners in the above petitions have moved this Court to exercise the jurisdiction and power vested in it by and under Art. 71 (1) of the Constitution of India and to inquire into and decide what has been described as a "grave doubt" in connection with the election of the President of India and to direct the Election Commission not to proceed with the polling in connection with the said election which has been fixed for 6th May 1957, but to hold the same after duly completing all the elections to the Lok Sabha and the Legislatures in all the States of the Indian Union including the Union territory.
The first main petition was presented on 26th April 1957, and the second on 29th April 1957. Along with each of the said petitions has been filed a Civil Miscellaneous Petition asking for a stay of the polling for the Presidential election fixed for 6th May 1957. In the first main petition the Returning Officer has not been made a party, but in the second petition he has been impleaded as a respondent. The learned Attorney-General has appeared on behalf of the Election Commission and has waived the service of notice. We can, therefore, dispose of all the petitions before us.
2. There is no dispute as to the material facts which may shortly be stated as follows:
3. After the general elections in all the States and Union territories of India, except in the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh, which is to return four members to the Lok Sabha and in two constituencies in the State of Punjab, the old Lok Sabha was dissolved on 4th April 1957 and the New Lok Sabha was constituted on 5th April 1957 under S. 73 of the Representation of the People Act (43 of 1951).
As required by S. 4 of the Presidential and Vice- Presidential Election Act, 1952 (31 of 1952) the Election Commission issued a notification in the official Gazette appointing 16th April 1957 as the last date for making nominations, 17th April 1957, as the date for the scrutiny of the nominations, 20th April 1957, as the last date for the withdrawal of candidatures, 6th, May 1957, as the polling date and 10th May 1957, as the date for the counting of the votes and the declaration of the result. The term of office of the present President is due to expire on the mid-night of 12th May 1957. The reason for fixing the above time schedule obviously was that the Presidential election should be completed before the term of office of the present President expired.
4. After the notification constituting the new Lok Sabha was published in the Press on 7th April 1957, the petitioner in the first petition applied to the Election Commission for the supply of the nomination papers, which he eventually received at Nagpur in the afternoon of 10th April 1957. This left a period of five days for the filing of the nomination paper before the Returning Officer at New Delhi. The petitioner submits that the time was too short and he was prevented from filling his nomination paper due to want of time. He has filed the petition as a citizen of India and as an Intending candidate for the Presidential election.
5. The petitioner in the second petition is a member of the Hindu Mahasabha and is contesting the election to the Lok Sabha as an independent candidate from Kangra Parliamentary constituency in the State of Punjab. He filed his nomination paper on 28th January 1957 as originally the polling was scheduled to commence in that constituency on 24th January 1957. The polling, however, has since been postponed and fixed for 2nd June 1957.
He has filed the petition as a citizen of India and as a prospective member of Lok Sabha and contends that if the Presidential election is held on 6th May 1957, he will he deprived of his right to vote or the election of the President of the Union. He has also complained of discrimination offending against Art. 14 of the Constitution.
6. Under Art. 56 of the Constitution the President holds office for a term of five years from the date on which
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.