SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.C. SHAH AND A.N. GROVER, JJ.
Boddepalli Rajagopala Rao, Appellant
Versus
N. G. Ranga, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1486 of 1968, D/-16-10-1970.
Advocates appeared
Mr. B. R. L. Iyengar, Sr. Advocate (Mr. A. V. V. Hair, Advocate, with him), for Appellant; Mr. A. S.R. Chari, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. P. Lingayya Choudhary, A Pandurangarao, K. Rajendra Choudhuri, G. N. Rao & K. Nagirathnam, Advocates, with him), for Respondent
Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Section 123 (l) (A) (a), (b), (5) and (6) and 77 - Application - Election - Corrupt practices - Appellant filed an application in High Court of Andhra Pradesh to set aside election of respondent on ground that respondent had committed diverse corrupt practices described in Section 123 (l) (A) (a), (b), (5) and (6) of Representation of People Act, 1951 - Respondent denied allegations made in petition - He also submitted that allegations were vague and indefinite and some of those allegations did not constitute any corrupt practice within meaning of the Representation of People Act, l951 - Appellant amended petition and submitted particulars of certain corrupt practices set out in original petition - Appellant then filed his additional written statement - High Court held on a detailed consideration of evidence that corrupt practices alleged by appellant in petition were not proved - Whether Congress Party could not get a candidate with better character and record of selfless public service ? – Held, Towards boarding and lodging expenses of workers, it appears, President of District Swatantra Party had paid Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 1,200/ after election - It was proved by evidence that party office was in house - Walkers were lodged and boarded at a place called Lodging and Boarding Lodge and expenditure incurred for them was met - Amounts which were paid by were not shown to be paid towards expenses of lodging and boarding of workers - Manager of Sri Lodge apparently boarded and lodged those workers free of charge - Appellant s case that expenditure was incurred for "wall posters" and for printing, distributing and exhibiting them amounting to Rs. 2,081/- was not pressed, nor was case about expenditure incurred in respect of "cycle-rickshaws and jutkas" pressed before Court - Even if it be granted that an amount of Rupee 500/- which was incurred for purchasing voters lists be taken into account total amount proved to have-been expended by respondent does not exceed Rs. 25.000/- prescribed under Act - Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
SHAH, J.:- At a bye erection held in April 1967 to elect a member of the Lok Sabha from the Srikakulam parliamentary constituency there were two contesting candidates -Boddepalli Rajagopala Rao-hereinafter called "the appellant"- and N. G. Ranga - hereinafter called "the respondent". The respondent was declared elected. The appellant filed an application in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh to set aside the election of the respondent on the ground that the respondent had committed diverse corrupt practices described in Section 123 (l) (A) (a), (b), (5) and (6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The respondent denied the allegations made in the petition. He also submitted that the allegations were vague and indefinite and some of those allegations did not constitute any corrupt practice within the meaning of the Representation of the People Act, l951. The appellant amended the petition and submitted particulars of certain corrupt practices set out in the original petition. The appellant then filed his additional written statement. The High Court held on a detailed consideration of the evidence that the corrupt practices alleged by the appellant in the petition were not proved, and dismissed the petition. The appellant has appealed to this Court under S. 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
2. Counsel for the appellant restricted his argument to the following charges set out in the petition:
(1) A charge of bribery in respect of an amount of Rs. 4,000/- paid to a candidate in the election as gratification for not standing for election, Rs. 10,000/- for constructing a high school building in the village Kothakotha with the object of inducing the voters in the village and three other contiguous polling stations to vote for him; and Rs. 1,000/- paid for completing the excavation of a well in consideration of promise of votes for the respondent. Thereby corrupt practices of bribery within the meaning of S. 123 (A) & (IB) were committed;
(2) Providing on the day of polling a number of motor-vehicles for the free transport of voters to the polling stations, and especially motor-jeep No. APK-9486, motor-lorry No. APK-9250, motor-lorry No. APG-3511 and motor-bus No. APS-1315. Thereby a corrupt practice under S. 123 (5) was committed;
(3) Causing the printing and publication of a leaf-let containing false and defamatory statements in relation to the personal character of the appellant. Copies of the leaflet were distributed at several meetings held by the Swatantra Party at Srikakulam and other places. The respondent and his election agent also exhorted, with the object of tarnishing the image of the appellant and lowering him in the estimation of the voters, the voters at those meetings not to vote for the appellant who it was alleged had misappropriated public funds. Thereby the respondent committed a corrupt practice under S. 123 (4) of the Representation of the People Act.
(4) That the account of the expenditure returned by the respondent did not disclose many items of expenditure which were incurred in connection with the election. The respondent had expended a sum exceeding Rupees 3 lakhs, and the expenditure returned was a gross under estimate of the expenses incurred by the respondent in connection with his election. Thereby he committed a corrupt practice under S. 123 (6) read with S. 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
In respect of the charge of bribery there were three heads - (i) that the respondent and his election agent G. Latchanna induced one Suvari Sanyasi Apparao not to stand as a candidate at the election by paying him Rs. 4,000/-as gratification. According to the appellant Suvari Sanyasi Apparao who was defeated in the contest for a seat in the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh in the general elections held in 1962 and February, 1967, intended to contest for the Lok Sabha seat in the bye-election and was canvassing support before the appointed date for filing nominations
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.