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

1996 Supreme(SC) 678

K.RAMASWAMY, K.S.PARIPOORNAN, S.P.BHARUCHA
Rampartapchandel – Appellant
Versus
Chaudhary Lajja Ram – Respondent


ORDER

1. This is an appeal by an unsuccessful candidate who then filed an election Petition before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. The election was to the 11 Doon Assembly Constituency of the State of Himachal Pradesh. The first respondent was the successful candidate. His election was challenged by the appellant on the ground of corrupt practices covered by Sections 123(4) and (8) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called "the Act"). Sub-section (4) of Section 123 refers to the publication by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of the candidate or his election agent of a false statement concerning a candidate which is known to be false. Sub-section (8) of Section 123 refers to booth-capturing.

2. In the election petition, the appellant averred that the aforesaid corrupt practices had been committed by the first respondent and Harbhajan Singh, his son, who was his election agent; also, by one Amarnath Kaushal, who was the counting agent of the first respondent. Both Harbhajan Singh and Amarnath Kaushal had been candidates at the election but had withdrawn their candidature. They were not impleaded as respondents to the electi














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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top