IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J.
Yadvendra Singh “Jaggu Bhaiya” v. Shri Rakesh Giri & Another
Election Petition No. 12 of 2019 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 14.3.2023
(1) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 123 (1) (A) (b)
-- corrupt practice -- allegation that 150 daily wage employees of Municipal Council were engaged for canvassing in favour of respondent No. 1 as his wife was President of Municipal Council -- held -- petitioner admitted that he complained only against two employees -- has not given details of all 150 employees -- he is hearsay witness as his source of information is Raviraj Singh Gautam -- petitioner had not seen any daily wage employee of Municipal Council canvassing -- evidence of Raviraj Singh Gautam does not inspire confidence as he is not Raviraj Singh Gautam -- his name and address in Aadhaar card are different -- no reliance can be placed on uncorroborated hearsay evidence of petitioner -- material discrepancy in testimonies of petitioner and Raviraj Singh and alleged complaint as regards date of canvassing -- allegation not proved. [Paras 18 to 20
(2) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 123 (1) (A) (b)
-- corrupt practice -- distribution of blankets, sarees and cash to voters -- petitioner not eye witness -- no reliance can be placed on his hearsay evidence -- evidence of alleged eye witness vague and general in nature -- he is worker of opposite party -- in absence of cogent and reliable evidence, no reliance can be placed on his evidence as he is interested witness -- as regards distribution of blankets and sarees by Gajendra Giri Goswami, petitioner has not produced any documentary or oral evidence to prove that Gajendra Giri Goswami was agent of returned candidate -- copy of written complaint made by alleged eye witness Rahul Mishra not filed though Rahul Mishra stated that he gave copy of complaint to petitioner -- Rahul Mishra unreliable witness as his evidence not corroborated by any other witness -- specifically pleaded in election petition that blankets and sarees were distributed to Rajesh Kumar Rai and incident was videographed by Kamal Singh, but aforesaid witnesses not produced in evidence -- also failed to produce any videography -- name of Gajendra Giri not mentioned in alleged complaint and it does not bear seal or signature of Returning Officer -- allegation not proved. [Paras 22 to 29
(3) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 123 (1) (A) (b)
-- corrupt practice -- distribution of Rs.2,000/- denomination note as bribe to voters -- evidence of receiver of money Firoz Khan and of his friend Dhanendra Singh does not inspire confidence -- Dhanendra Singh and petitioner from same community and resident of same mohalla -- village where distribution of money is stated to have taken place was not on Dhanendra Singh’s way -- no satisfactory clarification offered as to how he reached that village
-- Firoz Khan and Dhanendra Singh appear to be manufactured witnesses -- their testimony not corroborated by evidence of any other independent witness -- 10-15 persons stated to be present on spot but none named in petition and none produced as witnesses -- material discrepancy in testimony of Firoz Khan and Dhanendra Singh regarding persons to whom currency notes were distributed -- not the evidence of Dhanendra Singh that he too was offered money for casting vote in favour of Bhagwa Party -- Firoz Khan and Dhanendra Singh have not disclosed name of any other person to whom currency notes were distributed -- their bald and general statement that three persons gave currency note of Rs. 2,000/- to Firoz Khan bereft of specific details carries no credibility -- their testimonies suffer from improbabilities, infirmities and anomalies which make them unbelievable and unreliable. [Paras 31 to 34
(4) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 123 -- corrupt practice -- standard of proof -- allegation with regard to corrupt practice is serious allegation -- standard of proof is akin to criminal charge -- allegations required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. (1975) 4 SCC 769, AIR 1980 SC 1347, AIR 1981 SC 8, (1984) 4 SCC 649, (2009) 10 SCC 239 and (2017) 2 SCC 629 followed.
[Para 39
(5) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 123 -- corrupt practice -- proof -- allegations of corrupt practice must be clearly pleaded in petition with full particulars -- to be proved by cogent and relevant evidence -- no evidence admissible without pleading in election petition -- pleading of corrupt practice has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt -- burden of proof of fact is always on person who avers about such facts -- if initial burden is discharged then onus is shifted to opposite party to prove contrary -- unless initial burden is discharged, shifting of onus will not arise -- facts are to be proved in positive manner and not in negative manner. [Para 52
(6) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 56 -- Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 -- R. 15 -- closing of Electoral Voting Machine before prescribed time -- no complaint by any voter -- no objections by polling agents present in polling booths -- evidence of three witnesses afterthought and manufactured -- affidavit of one voter prepared after one month or more, that too after declaration of result in which petitioner had lost and was preparing evidence for election petition -- it cannot be said that Poll End Time shown on display of control unit of voting machines is closure time of EVMs
-- objection that EVMs were closed before scheduled time and some voters were deprived from exercising their franchise not tenable. (1969) 2 SCC 492 distinguished. [Paras 58 to 66
(7) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 100 (1) (d) (iv) -- Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 -- Rr. 49S and 56C (2) -- EVMs changed at time of counting -- no documentary evidence produced to show that before counting, 3 EVMs were changed by Collector or that any complaint was made by petitioner in this regard -- objections raised by Poll Counting Agent of petitioner were duly decided -- petitioner’s document is false and fabricated and actual number of control unit has been manipulated in it -- petitioner not successful in proving that EVMs were changed at time of counting which materially affected election. [Paras 68 to 70
(8) Practice -- no proof can be seen without pleading. [Para 76
(9) Representation of the People Act, 1951 -- S. 100 (1) (d) (4)
-- non-disclosure of criminal cases against candidate -- non-compliance of direction given in circular dated 10.10.2018 -- in nomination form, respondent No. 1 declared criminal cases pending against him -- details of criminal cases emailed to his political party -- information of criminal cases pending against him published in newspaper -- evidence of respondent No. 1 corroborated by editor of newspaper -- no notice of format 3-C given to respondent No. 1 by Returning Officer -- except petitioner, no witness deposed that said newspaper is not widely circulated -- evidence of petitioner not corroborated by any other witness -- initial burden to prove allegations was upon petitioner but he has not discharged burden by adducing cogent, legal and reliable evidence -- he has made no pleading about publication of criminal cases in less widely circulated newspaper -- also not proved by petitioner that due to publication of criminal cases in less circulated newspaper, election was materially affected. (2012) 3 SCC 314 followed. (2003) 8 SCC 673, (2002) 5 SCC 294, (2021) 10 SCC 241 and (2019) 3 SCC 224 referred to. [Paras 79 to 84
¼1½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 123 ¼1½ ¼d½¼[k½ && Hkz"V vkpj.k && vfHkdFku fd uxjikfydk ifj"kn~ ds 150 nSfud osruHkksxh deZpkjh izR;FkhZ Ø-1 ds i{k esa izpkj ds fy, yxk, x, D;ksafd mldh iRuh uxjikfydk ifj"kn~ dh v/;{k Fkh && vfHkfu/kkZfjr && ;kph us Lohdkj fd;k fd mlus ek= nks deZpkfj;ksa ds fo#) f'kdk;r dh && mlus lHkh 150 deZpkfj;ksa dk fooj.k ugha fn;k && og vuqJqr lk{kh gS D;ksafd mldh tkudkjh dk lzksr jfojkt flag xkSre gS && ;kph us fdlh uxjikfydk ifj"kn~ ds fdlh nSfud osruHkksxh deZpkjh dks izpkj djrs ugha ns[kk Fkk && jfojkt flag xkSre dk lk{; fo'oklksRiknd ugha D;ksafd og jfojkt flag xkSre gh ugha && vk/kkj dkMZ esa mldk uke vkSj irk fHkUu && ;kph ds vlaiq"V vuqJqr lk{; dk voyac ugha fy;k tk ldrk && izpkj ds fnukad ds fo"k; esa ;kph vkSj jfojkt flag ds ifjlk{; rFkk vfHkdfFkr f'kdk;r esa rkfRod folaxfr && vfHkdFku lkfcr ughaA ¼iSjk 18 ls 20
¼2½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 123 ¼1½ ¼d½¼[k½ && Hkz"V vkpj.k && ernkrkvksa dks dacyksa] lkfM+;ksa rFkk udnh dk forj.k && ;kph izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh ugha && mlds vuqJqr lk{; dk voyac ugha fy;k tk ldrk && vfHkdfFkr izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh dk lk{; vLi"V vkSj lkoZykSfdd izÑfr dk && og fojks/kh ny dk dk;ZdrkZ gS && rdZiw.kZ vkSj fo'oluh; lk{; ds vHkko esa] mlds lk{; dk voyac ugha fy;k tk ldrk D;ksafd og fgrc) lk{kh gS && xtsUnz fxfj xksLokeh }kjk dacyksa vkSj lkfM+;ksa ds forj.k ds laca/k esa] ;kph esa ;g lkfcr djus ds fy, dksbZ nLrkosth ;k ekSf[kd lk{; is'k ugha fd;k fd xtsanz fxfj xksLokeh fuokZfpr vH;FkhZ dk vfHkdrkZ Fkk && vfHkdfFkr izR;{kn'khZ lk{kh jkgqy feJk }kjk dh xbZ fyf[kr f'kdk;r dh izfr Qkby ugha] tcfd jkgqy feJk us dgk fd mlus ;kph dks f'kdk;r dh izfr nh && jkgqy feJk vuoyacuh; lk{kh D;ksafd mldk lk{; fdlh vU; lk{kh }kjk laiq"V ugha && fuokZpu ;kfpdk esa fofufnZ"V vfHkopu ds dacy vkSj lkfM+;k¡ jkts'k dqekj jk; dks forfjr dh xbZ Fkha rFkk dey flag }kjk ?kVuk dh ohfM;ksxzkQh dh xbZ Fkh] ijarq iwoksZDr lkf{k;ksa dks lk{; esa is'k ugha fd;k x;k && ohfM;ksxzkQh lkfcr djus esa Hkh vlQy jgk && vfHkdfFkr f'kdk;r esa xtsUnz fxfj dk uke mfYyf[kr ugha rFkk ml ij fuokZpu vf/kdkjh dh eqnzk ;k gLrk{kj ugha && vfHkdFku lkfcr ughaA ¼iSjk 22 ls 29
¼2½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 123 ¼1½ ¼d½¼[k½ && Hkz"V vkpj.k && ernkrkvksa dks fj'or ds :i esa #- 2]000@& vafdr ewY; ds uksV dk forj.k &&/ku izkIr djus okys fQjkst [kku dk vkSj mlds fe=/kusanz flag dk lk{; fo'oklksRiknd ugha &&/kusanz flag vkSj ;kph ,d&gh leqnk; ds rFkk ,d&gh eksgYys ds fuoklh && ftl xzke esa/ku dk forj.k fd;k tkuk dfFkr gS og/kusanz flag ds ekxZ esa ugha && bl ckjs esa dksbZ lek/kkuizn Li"Vhdj.k ugha fd og ml xzke esa dSls igq¡pk && fQjkst [kku vkSj/kusanz flag xढ+s gq, lk{kh izrhr gksrs gSa && mudk ifjlk{; vU; fdlh Lora= lk{kh ds lk{; ls laiq"V ugha && LFky ij 10&15 O;fDr mifLFkr gksuk dfFkr ijarq ;kfpdk esa fdlh dk uke ugha vkSj dksbZ lk{kh ds :i esa is'k ugha && ftu O;fDr;ksa dks djsUlh uksV forfjr fd, x, muds fo"k; esa fQjkst [kku vkSj/kusanz flag ds ifjlk{; esa rkfRod folaxfr &&/kusanz flag dk ;g lk{; ugha fd Hkxok ny ds i{k esa ernku djus ds fy, mls Hkh/ku fn;k x;k Fkk && fQjkst [kku vkSj/kusanz flag us ,sls vU; fdlh O;fDr dk uke izdV ugha fd;k ftls djsUlh uksV forfjr fd;k x;k && fofufnZ"V C;kSjksa ls fjDr mudk ;g dksjk vkSj lkoZykSfdd dFku fo'oluh; ugha fd rhu O;fDr;ksa us fQjkst [kku dks #- 2]000@&* dk djsUlh uksV fn;k && muds ifjlk{; vlaHkkO;rkvksa] 'kSfFkY;ksa vkSj folaxfr;ksa ls xzLr] tks mUgsa vfo'oluh; vkSj vuoyacuh; cukrs gSaA ¼iSjk 31 ls 34
¼4½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 123 && Hkz"V vkpj.k && lcwr dk ekud && Hkz"V vkpj.k dk vfHkdFku xaHkhj vfHkdFku gksrk gS && lcwr dk ekud nkafMd vkjksi ds leku gksrk gS && vfHkdFku ;qfDr;qDr lansg ds ijs lkfcr djuk vko';dA ¼1975½4 ,l lh lh 769] , vkb vkj 1980 ,l lh 1347] , vkb vkj 1981 ,l lh 8] ¼1984½ 4 ,l lh lh 649] ¼2009½10 ,l lh lh 239 rFkk ¼2017½2 ,l lh lh 629 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 39
¼5½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 123 && Hkz"V vkpj.k && lcwr && ;kfpdk esa Hkz"V vkpj.k ds vfHkdFku dk vfHkokd~ iw.kZ fooj.kksa lfgr fd;k tkuk vko';d && rdZiw.kZ vkSj lqlaxr lk{; ls lkfcr fd;k tkuk gksrk gS && fuokZpu ;kfpdk esa vfHkopu ds fcuk dksbZ lk{; xzkâ; ugha && Hkz"V vkpj.k dk vfHkopu ;qfDr;qDr lansg ls ijs lkfcr fd;k tkuk gksrk gS && rF; ds lcwr dk Hkkj lnSo ml O;fDr ij gksrk gS tks mu rF;ksa dk izdFku djrk gS && vkjafHkd Hkkj dk fuoZgu dj fn;k tk, rc rRizfrdwy lkfcr djus dk Hkkj fojks/kh i{kdkj ij varfjr gksrk gS && tc rd vkjafHkd Hkkj dk fuoZgu ugha fd;k tk,] Hkkj dk varjf.k mn~Hkwr ugha gksxk && rF; ldkjkRed jhfr ls lkfcr fd;k tkuk gksrs gSa] udkjkRed jhfr ls ughaA ¼iSjk 52
¼6½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 56 && fuokZpuksa dk lapkyu fu;e] 1961 && fu-15 && fuokZpu ernku e'khu fofgr le; ds iwoZ can djuk && fdlh Hkh ernkrk dh f'kdk;r ugha && ernku dsanzksa esa mifLFkr ernku vfHkdrkZvksa }kjk dksbZ vkifÙk ugha && rhuksa lkf{k;ksa dk lk{; mÙkjfpafrr vkSj xढ+k gqvk && ,d ernkrk dk 'kiFki= ,d ekl ;k vf/kd ds i'pkr~ rS;kj fd;k x;k] og Hkh ifj.kke dh ?kks"k.kk ds mijkar] ftlesa ;kph ijkftr gks x;k Fkk rFkk fuokZpu ;kfpdk ds fy, lk{; rS;kj dj jgk Fkk && ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd ernku e'khuksa dh fu;a=.k bdkbZ ds fMLIys ij nf'kZr ernku lekfIr le; bZoh,e dks can djus dk le; gS && ;g vkifÙk ekU; ugha fd bZoh,e fuèkkZfjr le; ds iwoZ can dj nh xbZ rFkk dqN ernkrk vius erkf/kdkj dk iz;ksx djus ls oafpr jg x,A ¼1969½2 ,l lh lh 492 izHksfnrA ¼iSjk 52
¼7½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 100 ¼1½ ¼?k½ ¼iv½ && fuokZpuksa dk lapkyu fu;e] 1961 && fu- 49n rFkk 56x ¼2½ && erx.kuk ds le; bZoh, cnyh xbZ && ;g n'kkZus ds fy, dksbZ nLrkosth lk{; is'k ugha fd erx.kuk ds iwoZ dysDVj }kjk 3 bZoh,e cnyh xb± vFkok ;kph }kjk bl ckjs esa dksbZ f'kdk;r dh xbZ && ;kph ds x.kuk vfHkdrkZ }kjk dh xbZ vkifÙk;k¡ lE;d~:is.k fofuf'pr dh xb± && ;kph dk nLrkost feF;k vkSj xढ+k gqvk rFkk mlesa fu;a=.k bdkbZ ds okLrfod la[;kad esa Nylk/ku fd;k x;k && ;kph lkfcr djus esa lQy ugha fd erx.kuk ds le; bZoh,e cnyh xb± Fkha ftlls fuokZpu rkfRod :i ls izHkkfor gqvkA ¼iSjk 68 ls 70
¼8½ izFkk && vfHkopu ds fcuk fdlh lcwr ij fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼iSjk 76
¼9½ yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 &&/kkjk 100 ¼1½ ¼?k½ ¼4½ && vH;FkhZ ds fo#) nkafMd izdj.kksa dks izdV ugha djuk && ifji= fnukad 10-10-2018 esa fn, x, funs'k dk vuuqikyu && ukefunsZ'ku iz:i esa izR;FkhZ Ø-1 us vius fo#) yafcr izdj.kksa dh ?kks"k.kk dh && nkafMd izdj.kksa dk C;kSjk vius jktuhfrd ny dks bZesy fd;k && vius fo#) yafcr nkafMd izdj.kksa dh tkudkjh lekpkji= esa izdkf'kr dh && izR;FkhZ Ø-1 dk lk{; lekpkj i= ds laiknd }kjk laiq"V && fuokZpu vf/kdkjh }kjk izR;FkhZ Ø-1 dks iz:i 3&x dh dksbZ lwpuk ugha nh xbZ && ;kph ds flok; fdlh lk{; us vfHklk{; ugha fn;k fd mDr lekpkj i= dk O;kid izlkj ugha && ;kph dk lk{; vU; fdlh lk{kh }kjk laiq"V ugha && vfHkdFku lkfcr djus dk vkjafHkd Hkkj ;kph ij Fkk ijarq mlus rdZiw.kZ] oS/k vkSj fo'oluh; lk{; is'k dj Hkkj dk fuoZgu ugha fd;k && mlus de izlkj okys lekpkji= esa nkafMd izdj.kksa ds izdk'ku dk vfHkopu ugha fd;k && ;kph }kjk ;g Hkh lkfcr ugha fd;k x;k fd de izlkj okys lekpkji= esa nkafMd izdj.kksa ds izdk'ku ds dkj.k fuokZpu rkfRod :i ls izHkkfor gqvkA ¼2012½3 ,l lh lh 314 vuqlfjrA ¼2003½8 ,l lh lh 673] ¼2002½5 ,l lh lh 294] ¼2021½10 ,l lh lh 241 rFkk ¼2019½3 ,l lh lh 224 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 79 ls 84
ORDER
1. This petition under section 80 and 81of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (for short “the R.P.Act”) has been filed by defeated candidate with the symbol of hand (Panja) calling in question the election of Shri Rakesh Giri (respondent No.1) a returned candidate with the symbol of Lotus (Kamal) from constituency No.43, Tikamgarh in the general election for Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly held in the year 2018.
2. It is not disputed that in the general election, 2018 for Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly, 17 candidates including respondent No.1 Rakesh Giri- the official candidate of Bhartiya Janata Party and Shri Yadvendra Singh- official candidate of Indian National Congress were in the fray. The polling was held on 28.11.2018. Counting of votes took place on 11.12.2018 and on the same day result was declared in which Shri Rakesh Giri/respondent No.1 secured 66958 valid votes and he was declared returned candidate. His nearest contestant Shri Yadvendra Singh “Jaggu Bhaiya”/petitioner secured 62783 votes.
3. The petitioner Yadvendra Singh “Jaggu Bhaiya” has challenged the election of respondent No.1 alleging that during his election campaign, he was indulged in corrupt practice within the meaning of section 123(1)(A) (b) of the Act which constitute under section 100(1)(b) and 100(1)(d)(iv) of the Act for declaring his election to be void. As many as five incidents of corrupt practice and one incident of non-publishing of criminal antecedent in the News paper as per circular dated 10.10.2018 by Election Commission of India have been alleged in various paragraphs of the petition which are summarized as under :--
(A) That wife of respondent No.1 was/is holding the post of President of the Municipal Council, Tikamgarh and, therefore, respondent No.1 had deployed the entire machinery and employees of the Municipal Council to facilitate in his election as about 150 daily wages employees were deployed for canvassing in favour of respondent No.1 at the dictate of respondent No.1 and his wife. One Raviraj Gautam S/o Ramashankar Singh R/o of Chhatrasal Colony, Tikamgarh on 6.11.2018 and 9.11.2018 at about 2 P.M. had been asked by Pradeep Rajak, Abhishek Giri and Gajendra Giri Goswami, employees of the Municipal Council, Tikamgarh to cast his vote in favour of respondent No.1. The aforesaid government employees were assigned election duty by order dated 5.10.2018 of the Municipal Council, Tikamgarh. The petitioner had filed complaints (Annexures A-8 and A-9) on 11.11.2018 and 15.11.2018 with the Election Commission of India narrating the illegal act of respondent No.1 and his wife. Cognizance of the complaint was taken by the Election Commission and all the Municipal employees who were deployed for the purpose of canvassing in favour of respondent No.1, were removed from duty by the Municipal Council, Tikamgarh. The order dated 16.11.2018 is Annexure A-10 and A-11.
(B) The respondent No.1 indulged himself in funneling cash, other gifts/handouts and liquor to the voters through his influential local supporters. Agents of respondent No.1, on his dictate and with his consent, bribed voters by giving them cash and other articles like Kambal and Sarees obtaining a promise to vote for Bhartiya Janta Party. On the dictate of respondent No.1 and with his consent, his agent namely Gajendra Giri Goswami came in a TATA Safari SUV and distributed Kambal and Saree at Village Patha, District Tikamgarh on 26.11.2018 between 7 PM to 8 PM to Rajesh Kumar Rai S/o Jairam Rai R/o village Patha and asked to vote in favour of respondent No.1 by pressing the button of Lotus in the EVM. The incident was witnessed by Kamal SinghS/o Babu Raja Thakur, R/o village Jatouwa Khass Patha and Rahul Mishra S/o Late Shri Rajendra Kumar Mishra. The incident of distributing Kambal and Sarees was videographed by Kamal Singh through his Mobile Vivo 07
Corrupt practices in elections, including undue influence based on religion and dissemination of false statements, violate the Representation of People Act, leading to disqualification and annulment ....
The burden of proof in election petitions for corrupt practices lies with the petitioner, requiring evidence beyond reasonable doubt, which was not established in this case.
The burden of proving corrupt practices is on the petitioner, and concrete evidence is required to establish allegations of corrupt practices and non-disclosure of expenses.
Clause (4) of Section 123 of Act shows that publication is required to be reasonably calculated by a candidate or his agent.
An election petition may be rejected if it fails to comply with mandatory pleading requirements regarding concise statements of material facts and particulars of corrupt practices as per the Represen....
Election petitions must allege clear material facts for corrupt practices; mere suspicions and vague allegations do not provide a basis for a trial.
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.