Judgment

RAY, J. : This is an appeal under S. 116-A of the Representation of the People Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) from the judgment and order dated 24, December, 1970 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana setting aside the election of the appellant.

2. The appellant was declared elected to the Haryana Legislative Assembly from Bahadurgarh Constituency. The polling took place on 7 June, 1970. The result was declared on 8 June, 1970. The appellant obtained 22436 votes. The respondent obtained 17760 votes.

3. The respondent challenged the appellant s election on numerous grounds.

4. The election petition was filed on 23 July, 1970. The written statement was filed on 2 September, 1970. Seven issues were framed at the trial on various allegations as to corrupt practice. After the conclusion of evidence the petitioner gave up pleas giving rise to issues Nos. 1 and 2. Issues No. 3 (I), (iv),and (vi) were also given up. Issues No. 3 (ii), 3 (iii) 3(v) and 3(vii) were pressed and the Court decided the entire issue No. 3 against the election petitioner. Issues Nos. 4 (a) and (b) were decided against the election petitioner. Issue No. 5 was held to be proved only relating to Chand Ram Rathi and remaining issues were found not to be proved. Issue No. 6 was consequential on issue No. 5 and inasmuch as the election petitioner called in question only the election of the appellant and did not claim any declaration either that the petitioner or any other candidate had been elected, no question of declaration under Section 101 of the Act arose. Issue No. 7 was answered by holding that the appellant was guilty of commission of corrupt practice under Section 123 (7) of the Act. The High Court, therefore, declared the election of the appellant to be void and held the appellant guilty of the commission of corrupt practice under Section 123 (7) of the Act and awarded costs amounting to Rs. 2000/-.

5. The election petition succeeded only on issue No. 5. Issue No. 7 was the consequential relief. Issue No. 5 related to Paragraph 16 of the petition and allegations as to corrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123 (7) of the Act.

6. The only question for determination in this appeal is whether the election petition was maintainable in regard to allegations against the appellant under section 123 (7) of the Act, which were comprised in issue No. 5.

7. The allegations in Paragraphs 16 of the petition were as follows : "That the respondent committed the corrupt practice of obtaining and procuring or attempting to obtain and procure the assistance for the furtherance of the prospects of his election from the following persons who are in the service of the Government and belong to the prohibited classes within the meaning of Section 123 (7) of the Act :

1. Shri Chand Ram Rathi, Lecturer in Political Science, Government College, Gurgaon.

2. Shri Gulab Singh, B. A., B. Ed., Government High Court (School?) Jaharasa (Gurgoan).

3. Pt. Bhim Singh, Assistant Sub-Inspector, Police Security Lines, Lytton Road, New Delhi.

4. Ch. Chhattar Singh, M. A., B. T. Teacher V and P. O. Bharai via Bahadurgarh District Rohtak.

5. Ch. Mukhtiar Singh, Inspector of Police, Delhi.

6. Ch. Raghbir Singh, M. A., B. T. Bahadurgarh.

The respondent has written letters under his own signature to the above Government servants soliciting their help and assistance in furtherance of the prospects of his election."

8-9. The appellant submitted preliminary objections. These were inter alia that Paragraph 16 of the petition was liable to expunction "for it does not give the necessary particulars about the nature of assistance and the place and the date where and when such assistance was sought or received from the persons named in the petition". The appellant further dealt with Paragraph 16 by denying the allegations.

10. The High Court by an order dated 11 September, 1970 dealt with the preliminary objection. As to allegations in Paragraph 16 of the election petition the High Court said