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

1976 Supreme(SC) 177

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. BHAGWATI, A.C. GUPTA AND S. MURTAZA FAZL ALI, JJ.
Mohd. Yassin Shah, Appellant
Versus
Ali Akbar Khan, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1141 of 1974
Decided on 14-4-1976.
Advocates appeared
Mr. A. K. Sen, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. Altaf Ahmed and M. Veerappa, Advocates with him), for Appellant; Mr. G. S. Pathak, Sr. Advocate, (Mr. O. C. Mathur and Shri Narain, Advocates of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co. Advocates with him), for Respondent.

Advocates:
A.K.SEN GUPTA, Altaf Ahmed, G.S.PATHAK, M.VIRAPPA, O.C.MATHUR, Shri Narain

Headnote:

Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act - Sections 47 (2), 47(2) (c), 100 (1) (c), 36 and 108 (1) (c) - Signature of the proposer - Nomination papers - Election appeal against judgment of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir which the learned Judge allowed the election petition filed before him by the respondent and set aside election of returned candidate who is the appellant before us - Returned candidate will, for short, be referred to by us as appellant and respondent will be referred to as the petitioner - It appears during elections held State of Jammu and Kashmir both the appellant and petitioner were the candidates for election to Assembly Constituency of the District of in the State of Jammu and Kashmir - There were other candidates also some – Held, Appellant and even if the order of the Returning Officer in rejecting nomination paper on the ground of absence of the candidate or his proposer was wrong, it could still be supported on ground signature of the proposer was not genuine - Learned Judge has not determined this aspect of the matter. In these circumstances – Court feel that the judgment of High Court is erroneous both on fact and in law and although the appellate Court is extremely slow in disturbing the findings of fact, in instant case – Court are satisfied judgment of the High Court is against the weight of the evidence on record and preponderance of probabilities - Appeal allowed

JUDGMENT

FAZL ALI, J. :— This is an election appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dated June 10, 1974, by which the learned Judge allowed the election petition filed before him by the respondent Ali Akbar Khan and set aside the election of the returned candidate Mohd Yasin Shah who is the appellant before us. The returned candidate will, for short, be referred to by us as the appellant and the respondent Ali Akbar Khan will be referred to as the petitioner. It appears that during the elections held in the year 1972 in the State of Jammu and Kashmir both the appellant and the petitioner were the candidates for election to the Karnah Assembly Constituency of the District of Baramulla in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. There were other candidates also some of whom had withdrawn. One Mohd. Yunis was the Congress candidate for this constituency but he was defeated. The petitioner, according to the appellant, was merely a coveringor a shadow candidate for the Congress candidate Mohd. Yunis. The petitioner filed his nomination paper on February 7, 1972 and his proposer was P.W. 1 Ghulam Mohiuddin. According to the petitioner the nomination paper was presented to the Returning Officer R. W. 3 Abdul Rehman Mir on February 7, 1972 by the petitioner who was accompanied with his proposer Ghulam Mohiuddin who had signed as the proposer. The Returning Officer received the nomination paper and granted a receipt for the same. A sum of Rs. 250/- being the election deposit was also deposited and other formalities were duly observed. February 9, 1972, was the last date fixed for the scrutiny of the nomination papers of all the candidates. According to the petitioner he reached the office of the Returning Officer at about 10 A.M. on February 9, 1972 but as he was suffering from dysentery he went to attend the call of nature and instructed his proposer P.W. 1 Ghulam Mohiuddin to take time on his behalf if the name of the candidate was called out. The petitioners case before the High Court was that the Returning Officer after scrutinising the nomination papers accepted all of them but rejected the nomination paper of the petitioner on the ground of his absence in spite of the fact that P.W. 1 Ghulam Mohiuddin requested him to wait for the petitioner who had gone to attend the call of nature. It was further alleged that when the petitioner returned he beseeched the Returning Officer not to reject his nomination paper but the Returning Officer refused to reopen the matter as the nomination paper of Mohd. Yunis the Congress candidate had been accepted. The nomination paper of Mohd. Yasin Shah the appellant was also accepted. Thereafter the poll was held on March, 8, 1972 and the results were declared on March 12, 1972. The appellant Mohd. Yasin Shah was declared elected, while Mohd. Yunis was defeated. After the results were declared the petitioner applied for a certified copy of the order of rejection of his nomination paper on April 1, 1972, and according to him the Returning Officer tried to avoid giving the copy of the said order which was ultimately given to him on April 3, 1972, April 2, being a Sunday. The sheetanchor of the case of the petitioner was that the Returning Officer was particularly biased against him and he rejected the nomination paper in order to support the returned candidate in whom he was interested. The petitioner further pleaded that the only ground on which the nomination paper was rejected was that the petitioner did not appear when the Returning Officer called out his name at the time of the scrutiny of his nomination paper. The petitioner further averred that under the law the Returning Officer could not have rejected his nomination paper on the ground of his absence even if it was so. Not content with these allegations the petitioner went to the extent of making a serious and irresponsible allegation against the Returning Officer by averring that the Returning Officer had committed forgery by
































































































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