SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1964 Supreme(SC) 39

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J.I., K.N. WANCHOO, K.C. DAS GUPTA, J.C. SHAH AND N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, JJ.
Jagdev Singh Sidhanti, Appellant
Versus
Pratap Singh Daulta and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 936 of 1963.
Advocates Appeared
Mr. Purshotham Trikamdas, Senior Advocate, (M/s. Rajinder Nath Mittal, R. B. Datar, V. Kumar, B. P. Singh and Naunit Lal, Advocates, with him), for Appellant; Mr. G. S. Pathak, Senior Advocate (M/s. Bawa Shiv Charan Singh, Hardev Singh, Rajendra Dhawan, Dr. Anand Prakash and Mr. Y. Kumar, Advocates, with him), for Respondent No. 1.

Advocates:
ANAND PARKASH, B.P.SINGH, BAVA SHIV CHARAN SINGH, G.S.PATHAK, HARDEV SINGH, NAUNIT LAL, PARSHOTTAM TRIKAMDAS, R.B.DATAR, RAJENDRA DHAWAN, RAJINDER NATH MITTAL, V.Kumar, Y.Kumar

Headnote:RIGHT CONFERRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE ON CITIZENS TO CONSERVE THEIR OWN LANGUAGE includes RIGHT TO AGITATE FOR PROTECTION OF LANGUAGE

       

Judgment

SHAH, J.:-

At the general elections held in February 1962 five candidates contested the election to the House of the People from the Jhajjar parliamentary constituency. On February 27, 1962 the appellant Jagdev Singh Sidhanti was declared elected. Pratap Singh Daulta who was one of the candidates at the election then filed a petition with the Election Commission praying, inter alia, that the election of the appellant be declared void on the ground that the appellant - Sidhanti - his agents and other persons with his consent, had committed certain corrupt practices in connection with the election. Daulta stated that the appellant Sidhanti was set up as a candidate to contest the election by the Hariana . Lok Samiti; that the appellant and six other persons - Piare Lal Bhajnik, Ch. Badlu Ram, Pt. Budh Dev, Prof. Sher Singh Mahashe Bharat Singh and Acharya Bhagwan Dev who were leaders and active workers of the GuruKul Section of the Arya Samaj had organised a political movement called "the Hindi agitation" in 1957 the real object of which was to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between the Sikh and Hindu communities in the State of Punjab "on the ground of religion and language" to promote their prospects in the general elections to be held in 1962, and for that purpose they held meetings in the Hariana region of the Punjab and appealed to the electorate to vote for Sidhanti "on the ground of his religion and language", and used a religious symbol - flag called "Om Dhwaj" in all these meetings, that the appellant himself made similar appeals to the electorate and appealed to them to refrain from voting for Daulta who was a sitting member of the House of the People from the constituency stating that he - Daulta - was an enemy of the Arya Samaj and of the Hindi language, that during the election campaign fifteen meetings were held between December 10, 1961 and February 18, 1962 and at all these meetings appeals were made to the electorate on the ground of religion and language of Sidhanti,. and attempts were made to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between Sikhs and Hindus of the Punjab. Allegations about undue influence on the voters in the exercise of their free electoral right were also made in the petition, and details of these alleged corrupt practices were furnished in the schedule annexed to the petition.

2. Sidhanti denied that the six persons who were named as his agents and supporters ever acted as his agents in his election campaign and submitted that they were merely interested in the success of the candidates set up by the Hariana Lok Samiti and acted throughout "on their own and not as his agents". He also submitted that the Hariana Lok Samiti had no connection with the Arya Samaj, it being a political organization started by Prof. Sher Singh who was an important political leader in the Hariana region. Sidhanti admitted that he had participated in the meetings to canvass votes, but claimed that he was not responsible for convening the meetings or for the speeches made by others in those meetings, that the Om flag was not a religious symbol and denied that it was used on any occasion by him or his agents or the six persons named by Daulta in his petition, except Bhagwan Dev who was accustomed "throughout his career" to carry a pennant with "Om" and his own name inscribed thereon on his motor vehicle, but carrying of such a flag or pennant on Bhagwan Dev s vehicle during the election was not with his (Sidhanti s) consent and that it did not amount to commission of a corrupt practice as defined in the Act, that the residents of Hariana area were mainly Hindispeaking, but the Government of Punjab had made Punjabi language in Gurmukhi script a compulsory subject at various levels of school education and this gave rise to a wide-spread agitation against the policy of Government, that to resist the implementation of the policy and the programme of the Government in the administrative, economic and development









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top