JUDGMENT

B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:—These two appeals are preferred against the judgment and order of (a learned single Judge) the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Election Petition No. 16/90, allowing the election petition with costs and setting aside the election of the appellant (first respondent in the election petition) from No. 246, Sirpur Legislative Assembly constituency. Civil Appeal No. 3597/91 is preferred by the returned candidate while Civil Appeal No. 4086/91 is preferred by the election petitioner against the findings recorded by the learned single Judge on issues 1 to 5 recorded against him. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the returned candidate as the appellant and the election petitioner as the respondent.

2. Apart from the appellant and the respondent, there were four other candidates in the fray. The appellant contested as an independent candidate, the first respondent on behalf of the Telugu Desam Party and the fifth respondent on behalf of the Congress (1) Party. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 were independent candidates. Polling was held on 22-11-1989. The appellant was declared elected having secured 25,860 votes, the highest. The respondent obtained 23,419 votes whereas the fifth respondent (Congress (I)) candidate got 23,419 votes. Respondents 2, 3 and 4, the other independent candidates, got very few votes.

3. In the election petition, the respondent not only sought invalidation of the appellants election but also sought a declaration to the effect that he is the duly elected candidate from the said constituency. The grounds on which he impugned the appellants election are the following:

(i) That the appellant indulged in booth capturing and rigging in various polling booths, the names and numbers of which were set out in paragraph (5) of the election petition. The respondent complained of the said rigging and booth capturing to the appropriate authorities but no action was taken thereon.

(ii) That the appellant directed the employees of Bejjur Mandal to work for him in the said elections and the said employees actively canvassed for him. This fact was also brought to the notice of the District Collector but no action was taken against the employees. The teachers and wardens working in I.T.D.A. also canvassed on behalf of the appellant.

(iii) That the agents were driven out and were not permitted to enter the polling stations mentioned in paragraph (9) of the election petition by the agents and supporters of the first respondent.

(iv) The appellant propagated a false statement deliberately, with the evil intention of prejudicing the prospects of the respondent, accusing the respondent of having indirectly committed the murder of a labour leader Angala Shankar. The said Shankar was found dead in his premises on 12-11-1989. The post-mortem revealed that he died on account of drunkenness but the appellant claimed the said Shankar as his active supporter and went on propagating that the respondent and the Telugu Desam Party were responsible for his death. A procession was also taken out by the appellant from Kagaznagar police station to Bhatpalli (the village to which Shankar belonged). The supporters of the appellant raised slogans and displayed badges containing the words to the effect - the respondent and other Telugu Desam Party leaders were responsible for the murder of Shankar and exhorting the public to condemn the politics of murder adopted by Telugu Desam Party.

4. The appellant denied each and every allegation made against him. He submitted that the allegation of booth capturing and rigging is totally vague and devoid of particulars and ought to be struck off for that reason alone. With respect to the allegation of obtaining the assistance of Government servants, he submitted that the election petition does not contain an allegation that the assistance of public servants and Government servants was obtained either by the first respondent or with his consent. The appellant submitted further that the re