Judgment

RAY, J. : - This is an appeal from the judgment dated 26 March, 1970 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court declaring the election of the appellant void under Sec. 100 (1) (b) of the Representation of the People Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and further declaring the appellant to have committed a corrupt practice within the meaning of S. 123 (6) of the Act for incurring or authorising expenditure in contravention of S.77 of the Act.

2. The gist of the finding of the High Court is that the appellant showed in his return a sum of Rupees 900/- as election expenses after claiming a refund of Rupees 100/- but the appellant is found to have incurred or authorised expenditure of a further amount of Rupees 154.15 which the appellant did not include in his return and thereby the appellant exceeded the permissible limit of Rupees 1000/- by Rupees 54.15.

3. The finding of the High Court is that the appellant incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rupees 90/- for what is described as pink identity cards and secondly incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rupees 22.65 in respect of purchase of forms and election hand-books and thirdly incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rupees 42.50 on 18 trunk calls between 15 January, 1969 and 11 February, 1969 aggregating Rupees 154.15 which sum was not included in the return of election expenses.

4. The appellant was at the time of the election Chief Minister of the State of Nagaland. The appellant and the respondent were two candidates at the General Election in the year 1969 to the Nagaland Legislative Assembly from No.6 Western Angami Constituency. The polling took place on 6, 8 and 10 February, 1969 and counting of votes took place on 12 February, 1969. The appellant polled 1933 votes. The respondent polled 935 votes. On 12 February, 1969 the result of the election was declared and the appellant having secured the majority of valid votes was declared to be elected.

5. The respondent in the election petition alleged that the appellant included in his return as election expenses the sum of Rupees 75/- paid by him to Kohima Printing Press on 17 January, 1969 for printing blue identity cards and the appellant did not include in the said return a sum of Rupees 90/- paid by him to Kohima Printing Press on 29 January, 1969 for printing a set of pink identity cards issued by him. The appellant in his written statement denied that he spent Rupees 90/- for the purpose of printing identity cards that were used by him in any way in his election. The appellant stated that he spent Rupees 75/- only for printing the identity cards which were used in the election and the same has been property accounted for in his statement for his election expenses.

6. Under Section 123 (6) of the Representation of the People Act the incurring or authorising of expenditure in contravention of Section 77 is a corrupt practice for the purpose of the Act. Section 77 deals with account of election expenses and maximum thereof. The first sub-section states that every candidate at an election shall, either by himself or by his election agent, keep a separate and correct account of all expenditure in connection with the election incurred or authorised by him or by his election agent between the date of publication of the notification calling the election and the date of declaration of the result thereof both dates inclusive. The second sub-section states that the account shall contain such particulars, as may be prescribed. The third sub-section states that the total amount shall not exceed such amount as may be prescribed. The prescribed maximum for election expenses is the sum of Rupees 1000/- as will be found in Rule 90 (2) of the Conduct of Election Rules. That is the sum prescribed for the State of Nagaland for State Assembly Election. For other States different amounts are prescribed as the maximum of election expenses for the State Assemblies.

7. The relevant issue with regard to the alleged expenditure of