TMI Blog1984 (10) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The place of the respondent found favour with the High Court which set aside the election of the appellant. Hence, this appeal to this court. 2. Several decisions of this Court have laid down various tests to determine a corrupt practice and the standard of proof required to establish such corrupt practices and it is not necessary for us to repeat the dictum laid down by this Court and the approach to be made in detail because the matter is no longer res integra but is concluded by a large number of authorities. To quote a few recent ones : Daulat Ram Chauhan v. Anand Sharma [1984]2SCR419 , Manmohan Kalia v. Yash and Ors. [1984]3SCR383 , A. Younus Kunju v. R.S. UNNI and Ors. [1984]3SCR162 , as also an earlier decision of this Court in Samant N. Balakrishna etc. v. George Fernandez and Ors. etc. [1969]3SCR603 . 3. The sum and substance of these decisions is that a charge of corrupt practice has to be proved by convincing evidence and not merely by preponderance of probabilities. As the charge of a corrupt practice is in the nature of a criminal charge, it is for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant. There is no ritualistic formula nor a cut-and-dried test to lay down as to how a charge of undue influence can be proved but if all the circumstances taken together lead to the irresistible inference that the voters were pressurised, threatened or assaulted at the instance of either the candidate or his supporters or agents with his consent or with his agents' consent that should be sufficient to vitiate the election of the returned candidate. 8. We would, however like to add a word of caution regarding the nature of approach to be made in cases where allegations of fraud or undue influence are made. While insisting on standard of strict proof, : the Court should not extend or stretch this doctrine to such an extreme extent as to make it well-nigh impossible to prove an allegation of corrupt practice. Such an approach would defeat and frustrate the very laudable and sacrosanct object of the Act in maintaining purity of the electoral process. 9. By and large, the Court in such cases while appreciating of analysing the evidence must be guided by the following considerations : 1. the nature, character, respectability and credibility of the evidence, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r testifies that he saw the respondent at the booth and that he also knew the appellant (Ram Sharan Yadav). He goes on to narrate that he saw one Ram Prasad Yadav of Ibrahimpur at the booth; the appellant appeared on the scene and asked Ram Prasad Yadav as to how the polling was going on, to which he was informed that the., polling did not appear to be favourable to him., Thereupon, the appellant ordered Ram Prasad Yadav to capture the booth and after giving this instruction he left the place. It is clear from the evidence of this independent witness that the threatening and obstructing of the voters was done at the orders of the, appellant himself which amply proves the allegation of undue influence. The Witness, goes on to state that after the appellant had left the place, about, 300-400 men of the appellant surrounded the booth and removed the voters, including the witness, from the queue and therefore they could not cast their votes. Among the persons who had acted in such a fashion, the witness identified, Babu Chand, Ram Chandra Mahto, Bisheshwar Yadav., Ram. Prasad Yadav and Surajdeo Yadav., In cross-examination, the witness clarified that he made ah oral complaint to the Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the aforesaid alibi has been invented by respondent No. 6 for the first time when he came in the witness box with a view to controvert the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner that on the date of poll he had gone to Bhurkunda Booth at about 11.30 a.m.... In his cross-examination he has pleaded ignorance if his workers had surrounded the petitioner on the date of poll at Bhurkunda Booth, and he has further pleaded ignorance if any criminal case concerning the incident at the Bhurkunda Booth was instituted by Shri Ramesh Chandra Raman, the Magistrate-in-charge of the striking force, or if any weapon like lathi, grasa, etc. was recovered from the arrested persons at Bhurkunda Booth. 15. Having regard to his evidence, the High Court concludes as follows : In view of the overwhelming evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner, which I have already discussed above, I am also not prepared to place any reliance on the aforesaid feigned ignorance of respondent No. 6. 16. As regards the evidence of Kailash Yadav (RW 12), he has merely stated that when he reached the Bhurkunda booth at 11.30 a.m. he found the poll to be peaceful. In order to explain away the exact happeni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
