1954 Present: de Silva J.

S. J. V. CHELVANAYAKAM, Petitioner, and S. NATESAN,
Respondent

Election Petition No. 17 of 1952, Kankesanturai

Parliamentary election-Agency-Principles applicable-Proof of agency-Election offences-Degree of proof required.

In Parliamentary elections the relationship between a candidate and his agent is similar to that between master and servant. A candidate is liable for the corrupt acts of his agent, provided they were done within the scope of his authority, even though the candidate may have taken the precaution of warning the agent against such acts.

Agency may arise not only by express appointment but also may be implied from circumstances. But before the Court can infer agency from surrounding circumstances it must be satisfied that that is the only inference which can be drawn from the facts proved. The mere non-interference by a candidate with persons who on their own work for him is not sufficient to saddle him with the consequences of the corrupt acts of which he was ignorant.

Election offences must be strictly proved. The degree of proof required is the same as in a criminal charge.

ELECTION pe