B. P. MAURYA versus PRAKASH VIR SHASTRI & ORS.

Citation: [1970] 1 S.C.R. 894 · Decided: 14-08-1969 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. HEGDE · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

894 
B. P. MAURYA 
v. 
PRAKASH vm SHASTRI & ORS. 
August 14, 1969 
[K. S. HEGDE AND .A. N. RAY, JJ] 
Representation of the People Act, 1951, s. 123(3) (3A) & (4)- Cor-
rupt practice--"Allegations against ''personal character and conduct". 
The appellant challenged the election of. the respondent on the ground 
that the respondent committed various corrupt practices including that of 
publication of false statements in relation to the personal character of the 
appellant. The High Court held the allegations not proved. Dismissing 
the appeal, 
HELD: The provisions contained in sub-s. (4) of s. 123 are con-
travened when "any false allegation of fact pierces the politician and 
touches the person of the candidafe". 
It is the personal character and 
conduct of the candidate which is· to be protected from malicious or false 
attacks. 
The \vords "perso11al character and conduct" are to be equated 
with mental or moral nature and the word "conduct" connotes a petson's 
actions and beWiviour. 
The statems:,qt in question has to be first a false 
statement bCaring on the personal crntracter and conduct of the candidate 
and secondly, the statement complaili.ed of must be one which is reason-
ably calculated,_ to prejudice the prospects of the election of the persvn. 
[903 HJ 
T. K. Gangi Reddy v. M: C. Anianeya Reddy, [!965] 1 S.C.R. 175, re-
ferred to. 
The electorate at the time of the election has to be kept in the fore~ 
front in judging whether a publication can be said to offend the provisions 
relating to corrupt practices. The Court is to ascertain whether the state· 
men( is reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the candidate's 
election. In rending the documents it would be unrealistic to ignore that 
when appeals are made by candidate there is an element of partisan feelin~ 
and there is extravagance Of expression in attacking one another and it 
would be unreas<'nable to ignore the question as to \Vhat the effect of the 
pamphlet would be on the mind of the ordinary 'voter \vho reads 
the 
pamphlet. [905 DJ 
Ku/tar Singh v. Mukhtiar Sing/1, [J964J 7 S.C.R. 790, referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 157' of 
1968. 
Appeal under s. 11'6-A of the Representation of the People 
Act, 1951 from the judgment-and order dated April 12, 1968 of 
the Allahabad High Court in I;-lection Petition No. 19 of 1967. 
The appellant appeared in person. 
L. M. Singhvi, Veda Vyasa, Rishi Ram, Bishambl1ar Lal, 
H. K. Puri, U. P. Singh and K. Kl Jain for respondent No. 1. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Ray, J. This i• an appeal against the judgment and order 
of the High Court at Allahabad dated 12 April, 1968 dismissing 
the election petition filed by the appellant. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
B. P. MAURYA V, PRAKASH VIR (Ray, J.) 
8 95 
The appellant contested the General Election to the Lok Sabha 
from Hapur Parliarnent,ary Constituency in the year 1967. There 
were seven rival candillates numbered respondents 1 to 7. 
The 
appellant contested the election on the ticket of the Republican 
Party~ He was then a sitting member of Parliament. Among the 
rival candidates, Prakash Vir Shastri was· an independent candi-
date. The election sytj!bol of the appellant was elephant and the 
election symbol of Prakash Vir Shastri was lion. Prakash Vir 
Shastri secured 1,49,943 votes while the appellant secured J,Ol,S75 
votes. The Swatantra candidate Sri Nascem secured 34,274 votes. 
The Congress candidate respondent Sm!. 
Kamla Chaudhury. 
secured 33,988 votes. 
The appellant challenged the election on. 
grounds of corrupt practices as mentioned in sub-sections (2), 
(3) and (4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (here-·· 
ina.fter referred to as the Act). 
At the hearing of the appeal the appellant appeared in pen:on 
after counsel on his behalf had obtained leave of this Court to 
withdraw .and to allow the appellant to appear in person. 
The various corrupt practices on which the appellant relied 
relate to occurrer.ces at six places. 
The appellant did not press 
the other occurrences: The first occurrence relates to a meeting 
held at the Town HaUMaidan at Hapur on 7 February, 1967. 
The appellant alleged that at the Hapur meeting respondent 
Prakash Vir Shastri and his supporters delivered inflammatory 
speeches against the !tppellant and thereafter the said respondent 
Shastri's supporters entered the office of the Repub:ican Patt}, to 
which the appellant

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.