ITEM NO.1A COURT NO.6 SECTION XII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal No(s).1478 of 2015

KRISHNAMOORTHY Appellant(s)

VERSUS

SIVAKUMAR & ORS. Respondent(s)

Date : 05/02/2015 This appeal was called on for judgment today.

Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv. (A.C.)

Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG (A.C.)

For Appellant(s)

Ms. V. Mohana, AOR

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Subramonium Prasad, AAG, T.N.

Mr. B. Balaji, AOR

Mr. R. Rakesh Sharma, Adv.

Ms. R. Shase, Adv.

Mr. V. Paramveer, Adv.

Ms. Meha Agarwal, Adv.

Mr. R. Anand Padmanabhan, Adv.

Mr. Romil Pathak, Adv.

Ms. J. Amritha Saryoo, Adv.

Mr. Pramod Dayal, AOR

Mr. R. Nedumaran, Adv.

Mr. Vinod Khanna, Adv.

Mr. P. Soma Sundaram,Adv.

Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, AOR

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra pronounced the judgment of the

Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C.

Pant.

The appeal being sans substance, stands dismissed with costs

which is assessed at Rs.50,000/- in terms of the signed reportable

judgment.

(Gulshan Kumar Arora)

(H.S. Parasher)

Court Master

Court Master

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)

Digitally signed by

Gulshan Kumar Arora

Date: 2015.02.06

12:14:34 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1478 OF 2015

(@ SLP(C) NO. 14918 OF 2009)

Krishnamoorthy

... Appellant

Versus

Sivakumar & Ors.

...Respondents

J U D G M E N T

Dipak Misra, J.

In a respectable and elevated constitutional democracy

purity of election, probity in governance, sanctity of individual

dignity, sacrosanctity of rule of law, certainty and sustenance

of independence of judiciary, efficiency and acceptability of

bureaucracy, credibility of institutions, integrity and

respectability of those who run the institutions and prevalence

of mutual deference among all the wings of the State are

absolutely significant, in a way, imperative. They are not only

to be treated as essential concepts and remembered as

glorious precepts but also to be practised so that in the

3

conduct of every individual they are concretely and fruitfully

manifested. The crucial recognised ideal which is required to

be realised is eradication of criminalisation of politics and

corruption in public life. When criminality enters into the

grass-root level as well as at the higher levels there is a feeling

that ‘monstrosity’ is likely to wither away the multitude and

eventually usher in a dreadful fear that would rule supreme

creating an incurable chasm in the spine of the whole

citizenry. In such a situation the generation of today, in its

effervescent ambition and volcanic fury, smothers the hopes,

aspirations and values of tomorrow’s generation and

contaminate them with the idea to pave the path of the past,

possibly thinking, that is the noble tradition and corruption

can be a way of life and one can get away with it by a well

decorated exterior. But, an intervening and pregnant one,

there is a great protector, and an unforgiving one, on certain

occasions and some situations, to interdict – “The law’, the

mightiest sovereign in a civilised society.

2.

The preclude, we are disposed to think, has become a

necessity, as, in the case at hand, we are called upon to

decide, what constitutes “undue influence” in the context of

4

Section 260 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 (for short

‘the 1994 Act’) which has adopted the similar expression as

has been used under Section 123 (2) of the Representation of

People’s Act, 1951 (for brevity ‘the 1951 Act’) thereby making

the delineation of great significance, for our interpretation of

the aforesaid words shall be applicable to election law in all

spheres.

3.

The instant case is a