SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Online)(MP) 566

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
, J
Niranjan Dawar – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Ranjana Baghel – Respondent
Election Petition No. 1 of 2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.M. Mathur, A.K. Sethi
For the Respondents: Senior Counsel for Res. No.1

Election petitions require strict adherence to statutory provisions; allegations of corrupt practices must be supported by clear evidence to establish grounds for invalidating an election.

Headnote:(A) The Representation of the People Act, 1951 - Sections 80, 100, and 123 - Challenge to election on grounds of corrupt practices - Respondent declared winner by a margin of 1639 votes - Allegations included bribery, distribution of construction materials, and misleading information in nomination form - Evidence insufficient to establish corrupt practices or suppression of material facts. (Paras 1-4, 9, 17-19, 66-68, 110)

(B) Election Petition - Standards of Proof - The burden of proof lies on the petitioner to substantiate allegations of corrupt practices with clear and cogent evidence - Mere suspicion or general allegations are insufficient. (Paras 89-93)

(C) Procedures and Conduct - Election laws necessitate adherence to statutory provisions regarding nominations and disclosures - Non-compliance affects election validity, particularly in cases of undisclosed governmental dues or wrongful acceptance of nominations. (Paras 82-84, 108-109)

1. This is a petition under S.80 of The Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'The Act') calling in question, the election of (Smt.) Ranjana Baghel, (Res.No.1) - a returned candidate from Manawar constituency (No.199 - reserved for S.T.), District Dhar, in the General Election - 2013 of Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly.

2. In total, nine candidates, including petitioner Niranjan Dawar - the official candidate for Indian National Congress, and (Smt.) Ranjana Baghel (Res.No.1) - the official candidate of Bharatiya Janata Party, contested the election. Polling was held on 25th November, 2013. Counting of votes took place on 8th December, 2013 and the result was also declared on the same day. Respondent No.1 - (Smt). Ranjana Baghel, who secured 55293 votes, as against her nearest rival, Niranjan Dawar, who secured 53654 votes, was declared returned candidate by a margin of 1639 votes.

3. As per averments made in the petition, the election of the Res. No.1 stood materially affected because of her indulgence in corrupt practices and suppression / nondisclosure of material facts by her in the nomination form and, therefore, the same is liable to be declared null and void under S.100 of 'The Act'. A further prayer to declare the petitioner as the returned candidate in place of the respondent no.1 from the said constituency has also been made. The corrupt practices within the meaning of S.123 of 'The Act', alleged against Res.No.1, as averred in the petition, are as under:

(i) That on 24/11/2013, Res. No.1 extended illegal gratification by offering and distributing money to the voters at the temple of village 'Amlatha' in order to influence them to vote in her favour; Mukesh (P.W.2), a resident of village 'Amlatha' (Rajpura) and one Raju Patel, resident of village Ralamandal, had captured some photographs of this incident at the relevant point of time and that the matter was widely published in media. Allegedly, apart from this, a constable Gangaram (P.W.8) captured photographs of Res. No.1, through his mobile phone, while she was distributing / offering money to the voters, whereupon the supporters and workers of Bharatiya Janata Party, scuffled with him and snatched his mobile, regarding which, he lodged a report on 25/11/2013 at 11.40 am., with police against Res. No.1 and 3-4 other party workers on the basis whereof, crime No.549/13 was registered by police for offence under S.353 of IPC. On 06/12/2013; the petitioner had lodged a complaint (Annexure P / 5) with the election observer of constituency No.199 in this regard. (para - 10 of the petition)
(ii) That Res. No.1, in order to influence the voters in her favour, distributed cement and iron bars from a firm "Sanjay Kumar Manoj Kumar (Mithu Seth)" and arranged 100 bags of cement and 10 quintals of iron bar from the said firm for a temple situated at village 'Badgaon', regarding which a complaint (copy annexure P / 6) was made on 24/11/2013, to the Election Observer. (para - 13 of the petition)
(iii) That Res. No.1, distributed utensils to the voters from a shop namely - "Ajit Steel", Manawar, regarding which a complaint was made by the petitioner on 24/11/2013, pursuant to which, Shri. Dinesh Patel (P.W.6), a government officer of education department posted at Umarban, and Shri C.S. Roy of B.R.C, Umarban, went to the spot and carried out audio - video recording and also prepared a 'Panchnama' (memo) in that regard. Allegedly, a complaint, vide annexure - P / 9, was also made in this respect to the election observer (para - 14 of the petition).
(iv) That Mr. Rajkumar Jain, the authorized agent of Res. No.1 for the assembly election, indulged in corrupt practice at village 'Kuradhakhaal' by publically assuring the voters about some amount, electronic items and other articles to vote in favour of the Res. No.1. Allegedly, this incident was recorded by one Kalyan, resident of 'Kuradhakhaal', in presence of one Pappu Mukati. (para - 15 of the petition)
(v) That Res.No






















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top