Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Kanhaiya Singh and N.L.Untwalia JJ.
Badri Narain Singh
Versus
Kamdeo Prasad Singh
Election Appeal No. 7 of 1958 ; 8 of 1958 ;
Decided On : MARCH 20, 1959
The court considered the validity of an election petition filed under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, challenging the election of the respondent to the Bihar Legislative Assembly. The petitioner alleged that the respondent was disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly because he was a Ghatwal holding office of profit under the State Government, and that the respondent and his agents committed corrupt practices during the election campaign. The court found that the respondent and Hargouri Prasad Singh, another candidate who withdrew from the contest, were Ghatwals and held Ghatwali tenures, but that these tenures had been acquired by the State Government under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, before the date fixed for filing nomination papers. The court held that the acquisition of the Ghatwali tenures by the State did not affect the respondent's position as a Ghatwal, and that he continued to hold office of profit under the Government. The court also found that the respondent and his agents had committed corrupt practices during the election campaign, but that these practices did not materially affect the result of the election. The court therefore dismissed the election petition and upheld the election of the respondent.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Kamdeo Prasad Singh, filed an election petition under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, challenging the election of the respondent, Badri Narain Singh, to the Bihar Legislative Assembly. The petitioner alleged that the respondent was disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly because he was a Ghatwal holding office of profit under the State Government, and that the respondent and his agents committed corrupt practices during the election campaign. The respondent denied the allegations of disqualification and corrupt practices.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent and Hargouri Prasad Singh, another candidate who withdrew from the contest, were Ghatwals and held Ghatwali tenures, but that these tenures had been acquired by the State Government under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, before the date fixed for filing nomination papers. The court held that the acquisition of the Ghatwali tenures by the State did not affect the respondent's position as a Ghatwal, and that he continued to hold office of profit under the Government. The court also found that the respondent and his agents had committed corrupt practices during the election campaign, but that these practices did not materially affect the result of the election.
Issues: 1. Whether the respondent was disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly because he was a Ghatwal holding office of profit under the State Government. 2. Whether the respondent and his agents committed corrupt practices during the election campaign. 3. Whether the corrupt practices committed by the respondent and his agents materially affected the result of the election.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the respondent was disqualified for being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly because he was a Ghatwal holding office of profit under the State Government. The court found that the respondent and Hargouri Prasad Singh, another candidate who withdrew from the contest, were Ghatwals and held Ghatwali tenures, and that these tenures had been acquired by the State Government under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, before the date fixed for filing nomination papers. The court held that the acquisition of the Ghatwali tenures by the State did not affect the respondent's position as a Ghatwal, and that he continued to hold office of profit under the Government. 2. The court found that the respondent and his agents had committed corrupt practices during the election campaign, but that these practices did not materially affect the result of the election. The court found that the respondent and his agents had distributed pamphlets and newspapers containing false and defamatory statements about the petitioner, and that they had also transported voters to the polling stations in motor vehicles. However, the court found that these practices did not materially affect the result of the election, and that the respondent would have won the election even if these practices had not been committed.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the election petition and upheld the election of the respondent.
Kanhaiya Singh, J.
1. These two appeals arise out of an election petition under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act. In Election Appeal 8 of 1958 Kamdeo prasad Singh, the petitioner in the Court below, is the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner). In Election Appeal 7 of 1958 Bari Narain Singh, the returned candidate, who was respondent No. 1 in the petition, is the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the respondent). Five persons in all filed their nomination papers with regard to election to the Bihar Legislative assembly from the Sarath State Assembly constituency in the last general elections, namely, Badri Narain Singh, Kamdeo Prasad Singh, Hargouri Prasad Singh, Dwarka Prasad Singh and Nunka Saran. The last two candidates withdrew from contest before the last date fixed for withdrawal, that is 4-2-1957.
The first three candidates alone contested the election. The respondent is a Congress candidate and the petitioner is a candidate of the Praja Socialist Party. The other candidate, Hargouri Prasad Singh, was set up by the Jharkhand Party. The result of the election was declared on 14-3-1957, and the respondent was declared elected, as he had received the largest number of votes. The votes received by the different contesting candidates were as follows: Badri Narain Singh. 11328 Hargouri Prasad Singh. 10909 Kamdeo Prasad Singh, 9373
On 25-4-1957, the petitioner presented to the Election Commission a petition, being Election petition No. 279 of 1957, impleading only the respondent and Hargouri Prasad Singh as respondents Nos. 1 and 2. He challenged the election of the respondent on two grounds, first, that both the respondent and Hargouri Prasad Singh were disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a Member of the Legislative Assembly of the State because they were Ghatwals owning and occupying Ghatwali tenures of Babhan-gawan and Talukdeoli, respectively, and as such they held office of profit under the State Government, and, second, that the respondent and his agents committed corrupt practices.
The corrupt practices given by the petitioner comprised corrupt practices of using motor vehicles for the conveyance of voters to the poll and publication of pamphlets entitled "Sarath Nirwachan Chhetra Ke Matdataon Se Appeal" and "Ausarba-dion Se Sawdhan", as detailed in Annexure A to the petition, of newspaper "Jhankar", as detailed in Annexure B to the petition and of a notice, as described in Annexure C to the petition, making deliberately false aspersions on the personal character of the petitioner. On these allegations he claimed a declaration that the election of the respondent was void. In addition to this declaration he claimed a further declaration that he himself has been duly elected.
2. Both the respondents in the Court below, Badri Narain Singh and Hargouri Prasad Singh, filed written statements. Both of them denied that they were Ghatwals and held office of profit under the State Government, They alleged that their Ghatwali estates had been taken over by the State Government under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Bihar Act XXX of 1950), and, therefore, their nomi nation papers were not improperly accepted. Har-gouri Prasad Singh denied knowledge of commission of corrupt practices by the respondent or his agents. By his written statement the respondent controverted all the allegations of corrupt practices made by the petitioner. He denied that he or his agents or any person on his behalf distributed any pamphlet, newspaper "Jhankar" or notice containing false allegations against the personal character of the petitioner. He also denied that voters were brought on trucks by him or his agents to the election booths. He alleged that on the contrary the petitioner himself was guilty of corrupt practices.
3. At the trial Hargouri Prasad Singh did not contest the election petition. The respondent alone resisted it. The following issues were framed by the Member, Election Tribu
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
