BRU MOHAN SINGH versus PRIYA BRAT NARAIN SINHA AND ORS.

Citation: [1965] 3 S.C.R. 861 · Decided: 05-02-1964 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
BRU MOHAN SINGH 
v. 
PRIYA BRAT NARAIN SINHA AND ORS. 
February 5, 1964 
[P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAll, C.J., K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. DAS GUPTA, 
J. C. SHAH AND N. RAJAGOP.ALA AYYANGAR, JJ.] 
Evidence Act (1 of 1872)-S. 35-Entry in official R.ecord main-
tained by illiterate person by some one else at his request-Admis-
sibility. 
· The appellant and respondent were rival candidates for election 
to the Bihar Legislative Assembly. The appellant obtained a majority 
of votes and was declared elected. This election 'was challenged by 
the respondent on the ground that the appellant had not attained 
the age of 25 years on the date of filing the nomination papers and 
was on that account disqualified under Art. 173 of the Constitution 
from being a member of the Assembly; that he held subsisting con-
tracts under the Bihar Government in his individual and personal 
capacity and was thus disqualified under s. 7(d) of the Representa-
tion of the People Act and that he and his party-men were directly 
responsible for publication and distribution of 
copies of 
l€aflets 
entitled qBagula Neta Se Hoshiar" 
containing direct insinuafions 
and aspersions against the personal character of the respondent, those 
being false to the knowledge of the appellant. 
The Election Petition was dismissed by the Election Tribunal. 
The respondent appealed to the High Court. The High Court came 
to the conclusion that the allegation that the appellant held Govern-
papers and that the appellant was guilty of a corrupt practice in 
the appeal and set aside the election of the appellant on the ground 
that he was below the age of 25 on the date of filing the nomination 
papers and that the appellant was guilty of a corrupt practice in 
that he had published the offending leaflets. With certificate of fitness 
granted by the High Court the appellant appealed to this Court. 
Allowing the appeal: 
HELD: (i) The burden of proving that appellant had not attain-
ed the age of 25 years on the date of his nomination was on the 
respondent and he had failed to prove that and hence the election of 
the appellant could not be set aside on that ground. 
The entry made in an official record maintained by an illiterato 
Chowkidar, by somebody else at his request, does not come within; 
Section 35 of the Evidence Act. 
(ii) The respondent had not been able to prove the publication 
of the leaflets by the appellant or his agent or by any other person 
with the consent of the appellant or of his election agent, and hence 
the Election Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that 
the commission of any corrupt practice by appellant under s. 123 ( 4) 
had not been proved. 
861 
862 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1965] 3 S.C.R. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1964. 
A 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 9, 1964 
of the Patna High Court in Election Appeal No. 2 of 1963. 
C. B. Agarwala, L.M. Sarma and D. N. Mukherjee, for the 
appellant. 
B 
Sarjoo Prasad and K. K. Sinha, for the respondent No. I. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Dass Gupta, J, The appellant Brij Mohan Singh and the res- o 
pondent Priya Brat Narain Sinha were among the candidates who 
contested the Aurangabad Constituency seat for the Bihar Legisla-
tive Assembly at the General Election held in 1962. The polling 
took place on February 21, 1962. The appellant received a majority 
of votes and was declared elected. The respondent Priya Brat Babu 
who was the sitting member was defeated on April 9, 1962, he filed D 
a petition challenging the validity of the appellant's election. He 
prayed for ;i declaration that the election of the appellant Brij 
Mohan Singh be declared void and that he (Priya, Brat Narain 
Sinha) be declared to have been duly elected to the Bihar Legisla-
tive Assembly from the Aurangabad Constituency. Among the 
grounds on which the appellant's election was challenged were these 
E 
three:-
([) That the appellant was born on October 15, 1937 and 
was thus under 25 years of age on the date of filing the 
nomination papers and therefore disqualified under Art. 
137 of the Constitution from being a member of the 
Bihar Legislative Assembly; 
(2) That he held subsisting contracts under the Bihar Gov-
ernment in his individual and personal capacity and 
was thus disqualified under s, 7 (d) of the Representa-
tion of the People Act; 
(3) That the appellant, and with his consent, his party-men 
Rameshwar Prasad Singh and o

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