Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Gau) 550

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Suman Shyam, J.
Smt. Zeneisiile Ate Loucii, W/O Lhoutuo Loucii – Petitioner
Versus
Neiphrezo Keditsu S/o Keneilhoulie – Respondent
El.Pet./1 of 2015
Decided On : 17-08-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ms. B. Chowdhury, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. P. Khataniar, Adv.

Point of Law : Law is well settled by a long line of judicial pronouncement that allegation of corrupt practices must be proved in same manner as a criminal charge.

Headnote:
Representation of People Act, 1951 – Section 80-A, 81, 99(1)(a) and (b), 100 (1)(b), 123(1)(A)(b) – Corrupt practices - Whether corrupt practice of bribery had, in fact, been committed by returned candidate or his election agent/or by other person with consent of returned candidate or its election agent - Supreme Court has observed that charge of corrupt practices are to be equated with criminal charges and proof thereof would be not of preponderance of probabilities as in civil proceeding but beyond reasonable doubt as a criminal trial. (Para 35).
Findings of Court :
Even if evidence adduced by election petitioner is taken on face value, even then, it could at best go to show that some money was distributed amongst villagers wherein Peter Kuotsu had some role to play but same would be insufficient, in opinion of Court, to hold that voters were being bribed by election agent of respondent, that too, with his knowledge and consent - In absence of any evidence to show that there was distribution of money amongst voters with knowledge and consent of respondent, election of returned candidate cannot be declared to be void on ground of committing corrupt practice within meaning of Section 123 (1)(A)(b) of Act of 1951. As such, it is held that election petitioner has failed to prove allegation of corrupt practice by adducing cogent evidence. Therefore, there is no scope for this Court to issue any declaration under Section 8A of Act of 1951 disqualifying returned candidate from contesting election in future.
Result : Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms. B. Chowdhury, learned counsel appearing for the election petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Khataniar, learned counsel representing the respondent.

2. The petitioner herein claims to be a citizen of India and a permanent resident of Zhadima village in the district of Kohima, Nagaland and an elector of No. 11 Northern Angami-II Assembly Constituency. According to the election petitioner, her name appears in the electoral roll of the said assembly constituency under Polling station No.2, Zhadima Lower (main) in Sl. No. 181.

3. By filing this election petition under section 80 read with section 80-A and 81 as well as the provisions of Part-VI of the Representation of People Act, 1951 ( herein after referred to as the Act of 1951), the election petitioner has called in question, the election of the respondent, who was declared as the returned candidate in the bye-election of No. 11 Northern Angami-II Legislative Assembly Constituency, Nagland, held on 15/10/2014, on the ground of commission of corrupt practice of bribery within the meaning of section 123 (1)(A) (b) of the Act of 1951.

4. Through her pleadings in the election petition, the election petitioner has alleged two different instances of corrupt practices of bribery allegedly committed by the respondent. The first instance of corrupt practice, according to the election petitioner, was committed by Shri Peter Kuotsu at the Zhadima village by distributing money amounting to Rs. 3000/- per voter, on behalf of the respondent, amongst the voters of 13 clans demanding votes. The relevant pleadings pertaining to the corrupt practice of bribery allegedly committed by Shri Peter Kuotsu at the Zhadima village, have been furnished in paragraph 7 of the election petition, which is reproduced herein below for ready reference :-

“7. That Zhadima village falls under No. 11 Northern Angami-II assembly constituency, Zhadima village constitute of 13 clans. On the 9th of October 2014 respondent’s supporter Shri Peter Kuotsu who is known as Peter distributed money on behalf of respondent amounting to Rs. 3000/- (Rupees three thousand only) per vote to voters residing at Zhadima village at Peter Kuotsu’s residence between 7:00-8:00 P.M. in Zhadima village. The voters who were paid are enrolled in the electoral roll of the constituency under polling station no.2. Peter Kuotsu is a N.P.F. party worker and in the nomination paper filed by respondent, Peter Kuotsu was the proposer of the respondent. Peter Kuotsu was Personal Assistant of Shri Neiphiu Rio former Chief Minister of Nagaland for about 10 years and respondent being son-in-law of Shri Neiphiu Rio, Peter Kuotsu played a very active role in election of respondent. The money was given to the voters through 5 (five) members representative of each clan who assembled in Peter Kuotsu’s residence that day. Peter Kuotsu asked the representative of various clan to cast their votes in favour of the respondent and they were also asked by Peter Kuotsu to ensure that all clan member cast their vote in favour of the respondent. Peter Kuotsu distributed money to voters/elector of the constituency with knowledge, consent and connivance of respondent. At the time of distribution of money petitioner’s clan was represented by Medozhalie Loucii, Khrielelie Loucii and Neizolie Loucii and they received Rs. 3,78,000/- (Rupees three lakhs seveny eight thousand) from Peter Kuotsu for 27 votes on behalf of Loucii Clan. Other representing 12 clans also have received money amounting to a minimum of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) per vote. 70% of votes of Zhadima village were purchased by respondent on 9th of October 2014 between 7-8 P.M. by Peter Kuotsu. Entire incident of distribution of money by Peter Kuotsu has been witnessed by Medozhalie Loucii, Khrielelie Loucii and Neizolie Loucii as these persons were present at the residence of Peter Kuotsu during distribution of money. On 09/10/2014 at night Medozhalie Loucii called petitioner and info