Back
1968 Supreme(SC) 407
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.C. Shah and G.K. Mitter, JJ.
Shri Krishan - Appellant
Versus
Sat Narain and others - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1321 of 1967
Decided On : 22-03-1968
For the Appellant :G.N. Dikshit, Advocate
For the Respondent:R.K. Garg, Naunit Lal, A.K. Gupta. S.P. Singh and Virendra Varma, Advocates
Headnote:
Representation of the People Act – Sections 77, 123, 100 – Corrupt Practice – Election Challenged – First respondent Sat Narain filed a petition to set aside the election of the appellant Shri Krishan who was declared elected to Haryana Vidhan Sabha from the Safidon Constituency in Jind District at the general elections held in February 1967. – Out of the several grounds set up in support of the petition, only one ground of corrupt practice on which the first respondent relied before the High Court need be set out; viz. that the total expenses incurred by the appellant in connection with the election between the date of the publication of the notification and the date of declaration of the result exceeded the amount prescribed under Section 9-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. – Held, It was never argued at any stage before the High Court nor was it sought to be elicited by further questioning that by "Vaid Jee" some person other than the appellant was intended to be referred. – No rational explanation was suggested as to why Koora Ram should be willing to give his truck free of charge for as many as eight or ten days, especially at election time when vehicles of that type are in great demand. – High Court, in our judgment, was right in accepting the testimony of Koora Ram in preference to the denial of Sat Narain and the appellant. – High Court was of the view that, having regard to the amounts which have been paid for hiring other trucks, not more than Rs. 50 per day must have been paid by way of hire charges for the truck of Koora Ram. – If once, it is accepted that the vehicle was hired for a consideration, the question in the present case as to the exact amount of hire paid is not of much importance. Koora Ram says that he had given a receipt for payment: the appellant has not produced the receipt. – Even if it be accepted that the amount paid was Rs. 400 only and not Rs. 800, the total expenditure incurred by the appellant exceeds Rs. 6000, and the appellant must be deemed to have committed a corrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123(6). – It is unnecessary in the circumstances to consider whether in addition to Truck No. PNK. 2629 the appellant had hired Truck No. PNK. 6019, and had paid Rs. 50 as hire charges for that truck. – Appeal Dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Shah, J.
1. The first respondent Sat Narain filed a petition to set aside the election of the appellant Shri Krishan who was declared elected to the Haryana Vidhan Sabha from the Safidon Constituency in Jind District at the general elections held in February 1967. Out of the several grounds set up in support of the petition, only one ground of corrupt practice on which the first respondent relied before the High Court need be set out; viz. that the total expenses incurred by the appellant in connection with the election between the date of the publication of the notification and the date of declaration of the result exceeded the amount prescribed under Section 9-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
2. Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act provides:
"(1) 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.
(2) The account shall contain such particulars, as may be prescribed.
(3) The total of the said expenditure shall not exceed such amount as may be prescribed."
Section 123 sets out what the corrupt practices are. Insofar as it is material it enacts:
"The following shall be deemed to be corrupt practices for the purposes of this Act: (6) The incurring or authorising of expenditure in contravention of Section 77."
By Section 100 the High Court is enjoined to declare the election of the returned candidate void, if the Court is of opinion, that any corrupt practice was committed by a returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a returned candidate or his election agent.
3. The appellant submitted his return of election expenses incurred by him on March 21, 1967, and disclosed therein that the expenses incurred by him in connection with the election amounted to Rs. 5838.32. At the trial he admitted that he had in addition to the amount returned, spent Rs. 67.80 and Rs. 34 in connection with the election. The total amount thus admitted to have been incurred amounted to Rs. 5940.12, and the maximum amount of expenditure prescribed under Section 77(3) in connection with the election to the Haryana Vidhan Sabha is Rs. 6000. It was the case of the respondent that besides the expenditure admitted, the appellant had incurred other expenditure for procuring motor trucks used in connection with the election. The High Court held on a consideration of the evidence that the appellant had in connection with the election spent Rs. 450 in respect of two Trucks Nos. PNK. 2629 and PNK. 6019 hired by him, and, the total expenditure incurred by the appellant on that account exceeded the maximum prescribed.
4. Counsel for the appellant substantially raised three contentions in support of his appeal:
"(1) that a new case was made out by the High Court which was not set out in the petition and which the appellant had no opportunity of meeting. According to counsel, allegations made in the petition were restricted to a charge of infringement of the provisions of Section 77(1) and Section 77(2) but the High Court made out a case of a corrupt practice under Section 77(3) read with Section 123(6). Again it was the case of the respondent that the expenditure in connection with the two trucks was incurred on the date of polling for carrying voters to the polling stations, at the trial a case was made out that it was incurred between February 9 & 16, 1967;
(2) that no issue was raised about the commission of any corrupt practice under Section 123(6) read with Section 77(3). No particulars were furnished as required by Section 83 of the Act, and that because of defective pleading and failure to raise an express issue, the appellant was prejudiced in that he was unable to prove that th
