1971 Supreme(SC) 78
A.N.RAY, G.K.MITTER
Bhanu Kumar Shastri – Appellant
Versus
Mohan Lal Sukhadia – Respondent
Advocates:
A.S.Bobde, D.V.DANI, GUMANLAL LODHA, I.L.GOHIL, J.S.RASTOGI, JAGDISH PANDYA, K.B.MEHTA, M.B.L.BHARGAV, M.L.VAIDYA, N.K.SHEJVALKAR, S.MOHAN KUMARA MANGALAM, S.N.BHARGAVA, S.S.Khanduja, S.S.PARAKH
Judgement Key Points
- The judgment has been overruled. [judgement_act_referred]
- Appeal against Rajasthan High Court judgment dismissing election petition challenging respondent Mohan Lal Sukhadia's election to Rajasthan Legislative Assembly from Udaipur City constituency. (!) [1000146490001]
- Respondent (Congress, Chief Minister) won by 3431 votes (24272 vs 20841) in election on 15 Feb 1967, result declared 21 Feb 1967. [1000146490002]
- Post-election developments: Congress minority, respondent resigned, President's Rule 13 Mar to 26 Apr 1967, respondent reappointed Chief Minister. [1000146490003][1000146490004]
- Petition filed 7 Apr 1967; amendments and particulars provided per court orders; 74 allegations, 55 dropped at trial; 30 PW for appellant, 46 for respondent. [1000146490005][1000146490006]
- High Court dismissed petition, decided issues in respondent's favor; appeal concerns issues 3(a), 4(a) on corrupt practices under Sections 123(1), (2), (4) RP Act. [1000146490007][1000146490008] (!) (!) (!) (!)
- Allegations in paras 8-11, 12-15: bribery/undue influence via public works (Raigar Colony pattas, Tekri road, Baluchistan Nallah covering, water taps); false statement re appellant's character. [1000146490009]
- Raigar Colony: No proof of 5 Feb 1967 meeting or bargain for votes at Re 1 pattas; policy from 1959/1962 implemented per Dec 1966 application; Ex 44 (10 Feb 1967) routine follow-up; witnesses unreliable; respondent's tour program precludes meeting. [1000146490011][1000146490012][1000146490013][1000146490014][1000146490015][1000146490016][1000146490018][1000146490019][1000146490020][1000146490021][1000146490022][1000146490023]
- No remission of development charges alleged or proved; new case not pleaded. [1000146490024]
- Tekri road: Long-standing project (1965-66) for bypass via Tekri village post police objection; piece-work agreements valid under rules; work within limits, no irregularity; no proof of respondent's 5 Feb 1967 meeting/bargain; witnesses disbelieved. [1000146490025][1000146490026][1000146490027][1000146490028][1000146490029][1000146490030][1000146490031][1000146490032][1000146490033][1000146490034]
- Baluchistan Nallah: Scheme from Aug/Sep 1966 due to public safety/hygiene; urgency per municipal resolutions; work started in anticipation of sanction (Jan 1967); loan sanctioned Feb/Mar 1967; no proof of respondent's inducement; routine official noting. [1000146490035][1000146490036][1000146490037][1000146490038][1000146490039][1000146490040][1000146490041][1000146490042][1000146490043]
- Water taps: No proof respondent influenced installation of 50 taps days before poll. [1000146490044]
- Leaflet Ex 8-A: False statement on appellant's encroachment; not proved printed/distributed with respondent's/ agent's consent; separate Congress Committee activity; no oral defamation proved at alleged meetings. [1000146490045][1000146490046][1000146490047][1000146490048][1000146490049]
- Respondent can support High Court decision on any ground, including adverse findings, per appeal procedure; court re-examined evidence. [1000146490050][1000146490051][1000146490052][1000146490053]
- Heavy onus on petitioner for corrupt practice allegations (criminal nature); must prove strong case; no vague/frivolous grounds to set aside election. [1000146490054][1000146490055][1000146490056]
- Bribery under Sec 123(1): Requires gift/offer/promise of gratification to induce vote; normal ministerial acts (e.g., grievance redressal per policy) not corrupt unless abuse of power for election bargain. [1000146490017][1000146490057]
- No evidence of extraordinary acts or bargains; works addressed long-standing grievances via routine policy implementation, not to win votes. [1000146490058]
- Appeal dismissed; parties bear own costs. [1000146490059] (!) (!)
Judgment
RAY, J. :- This appeal is against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated 10 May, 1968, dismissing the Election Petition filed by the appellant against the Respondent Mohan Lal Sukhadia.
2. The election of Respondent Mohan Lal Sukhadia to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly from the Udaipur City Assembly Constituency was challenged. The appellant contested the election on Jana Sangh ticket. The respondent contested on Congress ticket. The respondent was the Chief Minister of Rajasthan at the time of the election. Respondent No. 2 Mohan Lal also contested the election but obtained only 1262 votes. Respondents Narendra Singh Lakheri and Girdhari Lal Sharma Nos. 3 and 4 respectively submitted their nomination papers but withdrew them. For the purpose of this appeal we are concerned only with the respondent Mohan Lal Sukhadia.
3. The polling took place on 15 February,1967. The result was declared on 21 February, 1967. The respondent polled 24272 votes. The petitioner obtained 20841 votes. The respondent won by a margin of 3431 votes.
4. After the election the Congress Party was reduced to a minority. The respondent Sukhadia who was the Chief Minister tendered his resignation
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
