( 1. ) THIS is an appeal under Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), against an order of the Election Tribunal, Ratlam, setting aside the election of the appellant Mohansingh to the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly from Sitamau constituency. Eight persons, including the respondent-Bhanwarlal, filed their nomination papers for election from the said constituency. The nomination paper of Hussain Khan was rejected by the Returning Officer. Himmatsingh withdrew his candidature. The appellant Mohansingh secured the largest number of votes and was declared as the returned candidate. The respondent-Bhanwarlal, who was defeated at the election, filed an election petition, out of which this appeal arises, praying that the election of the appellant be declared void and that he, who had secured the largest number of votes after the appellant, be declared duly elected. The election of the appellant was sought to be set aside on several grounds which included charges of corrupt practices committed by the appellant. For the disposal of this appeal, it is unnecessary to mention all of them because the Election Tribunal found that excepting the corrupt practices to which we shall refer presently the election petitioner had not proved the commission of any other corrupt practice set cut in the election petition.

( 2. ) THE Election Tribunal has first found the appellant and his agents guilty of publishing two pamphlets (annexures D and E to the petition) containing certain statements of facts which were false and which they either believed to be false or did not believe to be true in relation to the personal character or conduct of the respondent-Bhanwarlal and which were likely to prejudice his prospects at the election. The material allegations in paragraph 11 (c) and (d) of the election petition relating to this corrupt practice are as follows:-"

(c) That the respondent No. 1 (who is the appellant here) on or about 18th February 1962 published a leaflet under the heading and therein made statements of fact with regard to the personal character or conduct of the petitioner, which is false, and which he believed to be false and did not believe to be true. This being a statement reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the election of the petitioner (Sic ). The leaflet is appended herewith as Annexure D. The full particulars of this corrupt practice mentioned in this para are given in Schedule A which forms part of this petition. (d) That respondent No. 1 published another leaflet under the signature of Gosai Ratangir of Chanderpura and therein made statement of fact with regard to the personal character or conduct of the petitioner, which is false and which he believed to be false or did not believe to be true. This being a statement reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the election of the petitioner (Sic ). The leaflet is appended herewith as Annexure E. The full particulars of this corrupt practice mentioned in this para are given in Schedule B which forms part of this petition. " In Schedules A and B to the petition Bhanwarlal, while giving, the particulars of this corrupt practice, stated that Mohansingh distributed the said pamphlets on or about 20th February 1962 and 23rd February 1962 at Digao, Gujarbardia, Malia, Semli, Udpura, Bansakhedi, Afjalpur, Sitamau, Bilantri, Dhundharka, Lasudava, Badvan, Salaria, and Khajurigoud; that Kailash, an agent of Mohansingh, distributed the pamphlets with his consent at Era, Dhahadpiplia, Salria, Kyampur, Kotda, Bahadur, on or about 20th 21st, 22nd and 23rd February 1962; that Laxmansingh, another agent of Mohansingh, distributed and published the pamphlets at Khejdia, Dhikria and Belsra between 20th and 23rd February 1962; that Jamunalal, also an agent of Mohansingh, published and distributed the pamphlet Annexure D with Mohansinghs consent at Badvan between 20th and 23rd February 1962; that Satyanaraya