Back
1973 Supreme(Gau) 13
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
R. S. BINDRA, J.
Projengton Momin -Appellant
Versus
Elwin Sangma and another -Respondent
Election Petn. No.5 of 1972
Decided On : 12-02-1973
K.M. Lahiri, S.K. Homechaudhri, A.K. Phukan and D.N. Chowdhury, N.M. Lahiri, A. Sarma and B. Kalita
The distribution of dummy ballot papers containing false information about a candidate's name and election symbol constitutes a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, if it is reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the candidate's election.
Headnote:
The court found that the respondent, a candidate in an election, had committed a corrupt practice by distributing dummy ballot papers containing false information about the petitioner's name and election symbol. The court held that this corrupt practice was reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the petitioner's election and declared the respondent's election void.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent, a candidate in an election, distributed dummy ballot papers containing false information about the petitioner's name and election symbol. The petitioner filed an election petition challenging the respondent's election on the ground that the distribution of the dummy ballot papers constituted a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the distribution of the dummy ballot papers by the respondent constituted a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court held that the false information contained in the dummy ballot papers was reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the petitioner's election.
Issues: 1. Whether the allegations set out in the election petition and on the basis of which the validity of the return of respondent No. 1 from 45-Songsak (S. T.) Assembly Constituency of Meghalaya Legislative Assembly is challenged constitute corrupt practices within the meaning of Sec. 123 of the Representation of the People Act. 1951? 2. If issue No. 1 is decided in the affirmative, whether the corrupt practices alleged in the election petition had been committed by respondent No. 1 and/or his party, agents, workers and supporters with the consent, knowledge and connivance of respondent No. 1? 3. If as a result of findings on issues Nos. 1 and 2 the election of respondent No. 1 is set aside, whether on that account alone the petitioner can claim the relief that he should be declared elected? 4. Whether the election petition is vague and lacks in clear and precise statement of material facts, and if so to what effect?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the distribution of the dummy ballot papers by the respondent constituted a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court held that the false information contained in the dummy ballot papers was reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the petitioner's election. The court relied on the following principles of law: * The publication of a false statement of fact which is reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of a candidate's election is a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. * The onus of proving the essential ingredients of a corrupt practice lies on the petitioner who alleges the corrupt practice. * The court must consider all the facts and circumstances of the case in determining whether a corrupt practice has been committed.
Final Decision: The court declared the respondent's election void and ordered him to pay the costs of the election petition to the petitioner.
In a triangular contest for 45-Songsak (Scheduled Tribe) Constituency, Meghalaya Assembly, out of a total of 4996 electors a mere 1177 turned up on 9-3-1972. the polling date, to exercise their right of franchise. The counting revealed that no less than 84 votes were invalid and that Sri Elwin Sangma, the respondent No. 1 of this election petition, had scored the highest number of votes, viz., 819. The other two candidates, the election petitioner Sri Proiengton Momin and the respondent No. 2 Sri Benjamin Sangma, respectively polled 176 and 98, and both of them forfeited their security deposits. Sri Proiengton Momin having felt aggrieved with the conduct of the successful candidate during the course of election campaign filed the instant petition claiming the double relief, namely, that the election of Sri Elwin Sangma be declared void and that instead he should be declared to have been duly elected from the constituency in question.
2. It may be mentioned at the outset that the petitioner had contested the seat as an independent candidate with "two leaves" as his election symbol and the respondent No. 2 had fought the election also as an independent candidate with "bird" as his election symbol. The successful candidate Elwin Sangma had contested the seat as the candidate of the All Party Hills Leaders Conference, hereinafter briefly referred to as A. P. H. L. C., which admittedly was and is the ruling party in the State of Meghalaya. The election symbol of Elwin Sangma was "flower." By common agreement the people of the constituency are 80 per cent illiterate and as such the election symbols had their obvious importance for educating the electorate.
3. The election of Elwin Sangma is challenged on the specific ground that he had been guilty of committing corrupt practices and the nature of such practices is set out in the paras. 9 and 11 of the petition. It is alleged in the said two paragraphs that Elwin Sangma and/or his party agents, workers and supporters with his consent, knowledge and connivance had got printed, and published, dummy ballot papers throughout the constituency which contained two palpable false statements. Firstly, it was mentioned in those dummy ballot papers that one of the candidates for the seat was "Projengthon Momin" instead of "Projengton Momin", the actual and correct name of the election petitioner. In the second place, the election symbol shown against the name of Projenthon Momin was "boat" instead of "two leaves", which symbol had been allotted to the election petitioner.
In paragraph 11 of the petition it is stated that the distribution of such false dummy ballot papers had been done by Elwin Sangma personally, and also by his agents, workers and supporters with his consent, knowledge and connivance, and that Elwin Sangma and such persons told the electors that the election symbol of "two leaves" allotted to the petitioner had been withdrawn and that the "petitioner was nowhere". It was pleaded further by Projengton Momin that extensive distribution of such false dummy papers amounted to misrepresentation to the electors on whom undue influence was exercised thereby.
4. In paragraph 17 of the petition are detailed specific instances of the distribution, circulation and exhibition of the dummy ballot papers. Briefly summarised, the particulars of those instances are as follows :-
(i) On the afternoon of 25-2-72 the respondent No. 1 circulated and exhibited dummy ballot papers to the electors in a tea-stall at Bollonggiri and told the electors that the "two leaves" symbol allotted to the petitioner had been withdrawn by the Government and instead he had been allotted the symbol of "boat" and that he was nowhere;
(ii) On the morning of 5-3-72 in Dagal Bazar the respondent No. 1 showed the dummy ballot papers while addressing a meeting there and then said that the "two leaves" symbol of the petitioner had been withdrawn by the Government and the petitioner was nowhere;
(iii) On the morning of 6
