BACHAN SINGH versus PRITHVI SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [1975] 3 S.C.R. 439 · Decided: 05-02-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A. ALAGIRISWAMI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
-439 
BACHAN SINGH 
v. 
PRITHVI SINGH & ORS. 
February 5, 1975 
[A. ALAGffiISWAMI AND R. s. SARKARIA JJ.] 
Repres~ntatlon of tlie Pf!op/e 1ct !951-S.123(2) and (7)-Publicativn of 
po.iters with pictures of Prime Minister and Chiefs of Staff-Whether amounts 
ta undue influence. 
The appellant in his ·petition challenging the electioa of 
the. responJcnt 
~leged (1) <hat the respondent had ?een guilty of committing a corrupt prac-
hce ~oder s.123\7) of the Representat10n of the People Act, 1951 in that he had 
obtmned the ~1~1~tance of a member of the. armed forces in his election and ( 2) 
that he had d1stnbuted posters with the pictures of th~ Prime Minister and other 
important ministers together with the three chiefs and four Generals of the 
Armed. Forces 
be~rii:g the capti_on 'Pillars of Victory' and thereby exercised 
undue influence within the meaning of s.123(2) of the Act. The High Court 
dismissed the petition. 
Dismissing the appeal to this Court. 
HELD : ( 1) Since the deletion of the words 'or a polling agent or a counting 
agent' from Explanation (2) of s.123(7) by the Amending Act 47 of 19Ci6, a 
member of the armed forces, merely by acting as a polling agent, is not deemed 
to assist in the furtherance of the prospects of a candidate's election within the 
contemplation of s.123(7) of the Act. 
Secondly, the Lanc_e Naik had cate- · 
· gorically asserted that he did the canvassing on his own and not in the company 
or the respondent. [ 441 G] 
. I 
(2) (a) The publication of the poster was an act of imP,ropriety but not 
one of corrupt practice falling within the mischief of s.123. 
Members of the 
armed forces spoken of in this clause mean persons in flesh and blood and not 
their inanimate photographs. (443 BJ 
(b) In one sense even election propaganda carried on vigorously, blaringly 
and systematically through charisma! leaders or through various media in favour 
of a candidate by recounting the glories and achievements of that candidate or 
his political party in administrative or political field, 
do~s meddle with aml 
mould the indepen_dent volition of electors, having poor reason and little educa· 
tion in the exercise of their franchise. That such a wide construction would. 
not be in consonance with the interidment of th.e legislature is discrenible from 
the proviso to this clause. 
The proviso illustrates that ordinarily interference 
with the free exercise of electoral right involves violence or threat of injury of 
any kind to any candidate or an elector or inducement or attempt to mduce a 
candidate or elector to believe that he will become an object of divine displeasure 
or spiritual censure. The orefix 'undue' indicates that there must be some abuse 
or inlluence. 
'Undue influence' is used in contra-distinction to 'proper inllu• 
ence'. 
Construed in the light of the proviso cl. 2 of s.123 does not bar or pena-
lise legitimate canvassing or appeals to Teason .qnd judgment of the voters or 
other lawful means of persuading voters to vote or not to vote for a candidate. 
Such proper and peaceful persuasion is the motive force of our democratic 
prOC%ss (442 E-G] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 186 of 1973 
' 
From the Judgment & Orrler dated the 27th November, 1972 of 
the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Election Petition No. 15 
of 
1972. 
Kapil-Sibal, N. D. Bhargava and S. K. Gambhir, for tl.e appellants. 
s. N. Marwah, Lalita Kohli, K. C. Dua and Naunit Lal, for the 
Respondent No. 1 
14 0 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
\ 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
[1975) 3 S.C.R. 
SARIWUA, J. 
Prithvi Singh Azad (hereinafter referred to as the 
returned candidate), Bachan Singh, Naurang Singh and Lachchman 
Singh contested the ck:ction to Pu~1jab Vidhan Sabha from the Kh•anna 
(Reserved) A%cmbly constituency. 
Azad wa.s the nominee of the 
Congress Puty and Bachan Singh of the Akali Dal. 
· The poll was held on March 11, 1972. On March 12, 1972°, 
Azad was declared elected. He secured 25,984 votes, whereas :Bachan 
Singh appellant No. l polled 24,865 votes. 
The other two forfeited 
their securities. 
O..i April 26, 1972, Bachan Singh; the unsuccessful candidate and 
·one elector, Harcharan Singh, jointly filed an election petition under 
the Representation of the People Act, 1951 challenging the eJ.ection 
·of the returned candidate on,scrveral grounds. 
In the event of Azad's 
·clectim being set aside, Bachan Singh claimed a further declaration 

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