IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Shiv Dayal, .P. Bhargava, JJ.
Bhagirath Bilgaiya
Vs.
Rishabh Kumar and Ors.
First Appeal No. 38 of 1963
Decided On: 02.09.1963
ELECTION LAW - CORRUPT PRACTICES - APPEAL ON GROUND OF RELIGION OR COMMUNITY - PUBLICATION OF FALSE STATEMENTS - INCURRING OR AUTHORISING EXPENDITURE IN EXCESS OF STATUTORY LIMIT - INTERPRETATION OF RELEVANT PROVISIONS - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - ELECTION SET ASIDE.
Fact of the Case:
In the general elections of 1962, Bhagirati Bilgaiya was returned to the M. P. Legislative Assembly from Bina constituency. Rishabh Kumar, who was a rival candidate filed an election petition alleging that Bhagirath and his supporters committed corrupt practices under various provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Bhagirath and his supporters committed corrupt practices by issuing cyclostyled pamphlets containing an appeal to vote on the ground of religion or community and to promote feelings of hatred between Jains and Sanatan Dharmi Hindus, by publishing false statements in relation to Rishabh Kumar's personal character, and by incurring or authorizing expenditure in excess of the statutory limit.
Issues: 1. Whether there was an appeal by the appellant, or with his consent, to vote on the ground of religion or community and also to promote or attempt to promote feelings of hatred between Jains and Sanatan Dharmi Hindus within the meaning of Sub-sections (3) and (3A); 2. Whether there was publication by the appellant, or with his consent, of false statements in relation to Rishabh Kumar's personal character or conduct within the meaning of Sub-section (4); 3. Whether the expenditure incurred or authorised by the appellant exceeded Rs. 7,000/-.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. An appeal to vote on the ground of religion or community or to promote feelings of hatred between different communities is a corrupt practice under Section 123(3) and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 2. Publication of false statements in relation to a candidate's personal character or conduct is a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Act. 3. Incurring or authorizing expenditure in excess of the statutory limit is a corrupt practice under Section 123(6) of the Act.
Final Decision: The court set aside Bhagirath's election and upheld the Tribunal's order declaring his election void.
Shiv Dayal, J.
1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
2. In the general elections of 1962, Bhagirati: Bilgaiya was returned to the M. P. Legislative Assembly from Bina
constituency. Rishabh Kumar, who was a rival candidate filed an election petition. The petitioner's case was that formerly
Bhagirath (appellant), Ramgulam Choubey and Brijkishore Pateria were members of the Congress. Being disgruntled, they left it
and became his strong opponents. In order to bring about his defeat in the election, they joined hands. They issued
cyclostyled pamphlets containing an appeal not to vote for a Jain but to vote for a Sanatan Dharmi Hindu and also containing
material calculated to promote feelings of hatreS between Jains and Sanatani Hindus. They also got printed" in a newspaper,
the joint resignation of Ramgulam, Brijkishore and another which contained false statements In relation to Rishabh Kumar's
personal character. The election was challenged on the grounds of bribery, undue influence, appeal to vote on the ground of
religion of community, promotion or attempt to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between Hindus and Jains on the ground of
religion or community; publication of false statements in relation to the personal character of Rishabh Kumar; hiring and
procuring vehicles for the conveyance of electors; and incurring or authorising expenditure in excess of the statutory
limit--corrupt practices under Section 123, Sub-sections (IA), (3), (3A), 4, 5 and 6 of the Representation of the People Act,
1951, (hereinafter called the Act). The petition was resisted by the returned candidate, Bhagirath.
3. The learned District Judge, Sagar, who was constituted the Election Tribunal, found that the returned candidate was guilty
of corrupt practices tinder Sub-sec lions (3), (3A), 4 and 6, and consequently declared his election void. Bhagirath filed
this appeal. Rishabh Kumar, respondent 1 (petitioner), filed cross-objections.
4. The questions canvassed before us are:
(i) Whether there was an appeal by the appellant, cr with his consent, to vote on the ground of religion or community and
also to promote or attempt to promote feelings of hatred between Jains and Sanatan Dharmi Hindus within the meaning of
Sub-sections (3) and (3A);
(ii) Whether there was publication by the appellant, or with his consent, of false statements in relation to Rishabh Kumar's
personal character or conduct within the meaning of Sub-section (4): and
(iii) Whether the expenditure incurred or authorised by the appellant exceeded Rs. 7,000/-.
5. Regarding the first question, the Tribunal has found that the appellant committed the corrupt practices by means of two
cyclostyled pamphlets (Exs, P-14 and P-28) containing an appeal to refrain from voting for Rishabh Kumar because he is a Jain
and to vote for Bhagirath who is a Sanatan Dharmi Hindu. The impugned pamphlet (Ex. P-28) runs thus:
^^Hkkb;ksa] vkt le; vk x;k gS fd gesa vius /keZ dh j{kk dk chM+k mBkuk iM+ jgk gSA gekjs lukru
/keZ ij tSfu;ksa }kjk ckj&ckj vke.k fd;k tk jgk gSA jryke esa tSfu;ksa us ,d eafnj ls f'kfyax gVok fn;kA tcyiwj esa jke vkSj
lhrk ds lEcU/k esa , vkifktud iqLrd NiokbZA tSuh ukfLrd gksrs gS bl dkj.k gekjs lukru /keZ dks feVkus ds fy;s vc ;s yksx
dkaxszl ds tfj;s lkk gfFk;kuk pkgrs gSa vkSj blds fy, prqosZanhth tSls lukru /keksZ dks gjkdj ewypan ns'kygjk tSuh dkaxszl dk
izkUrk/;{k cuk cSBk gSA r[krey tSu] feJhyky xaxkoky] n'kjFk tSu Hkh 'kklu ij gkoh gSA vkSj bUgha yksxksa us "kM+;a= jp dj
chuk ls ,d djksMirh tSuh lsB _"kHk dqekj dks yknus dk bjknk dj mls dkaxszl dk fVdV fnyok;k gSA ;fn vki vius /keZ dh j{kk djuk
pkgrs gSa rks /keZ dh nhid Nki isVh ij eqgj yxkdj tSuh lsB _"kHk dqekj [kqjbZ dks gjkus esa lgk;d cusA**
The offensive portion of the other cyclostyled pamphlet (ex. p-14) read thus:
^^------------- brus ij Hkh gekjs ij gfjtuksa vkSj eSfu;ksa dks yknuk pkgrh gSA viuh rglhy esa dqy
5000 eqVBh Hkj tSuh Ms<+ yk[k lukru /keksZa ij 'kklu d
1. Balwan Singh v. Lakshmi Narain, AIR 1960 SC 770
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.