LexELVIN SANGMA versus PROJENGTON MOMIN & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
c G H 801 ELVIN SANGMA v. PROJENGTON MOMIN & ANR. November 21, 1974 [A. ALAGIRISWAMI AND R. S. SARKARIA, JJ.] Election-Distribution of dummy ballot papers, shoWing rival candidate's election symbol wrongly-If corrupt practice invalidating the election. On three days before the election to the Meghalaya Assembly the appel~ant, who was the suooessful candidate, distribu.ed dummy ballot papers in va.nous places. The dummy ballot papers contained. as the election symbol of the first respondent who was a rival candidate, a symbol different from that aliotted to the first' respondent by the Election Commission. The first respondent success- fully challenged in the High Court the election of the appellant on the ll:I"Ound that he was guilty of a corrupt practiee under s.J23 ( 4 l of the Representauon of the People Act, 1951. D:smissing the appeal to this Court, HELD : In a constituency consisting of more than 80% illiterate electors the consequences of such distribution of dummy ballot papers with wrong sym- bols would be, (a) the voters who went to the poliing station would have been confused even if they did not go there with the intention of voting for the first respondent. (b) people who went there with the intention of voting for the first respondent might well have cast their votes either for the appellant or , for the other candidates find'ng that the first respondent's symbol was not there, or ( c) they might have gone away without vot:ng. Therefore, the distribution must have prejudiced the prospects of the first respondent's election. In a case where a corrupt practice is alleged and proved it is not necessary to further show the exact number of voteq which the fi•st resoon~ent lost or the apriellant gained. The corrup.t practice itself is enough to invalidate the election. [804G· 805B] / \ CrvlL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil .·Appeal No. 441 of 1973. From the Judgment & Order dated the 12th February, 1973 of the Assam & Nagaland 'High Court in Election Petition No. 5 of 1972. P. K. Chatterjee, A. Sharma and Rathin Das, for the appellant. S. K. Hom Choudhury and S. K. Nandy, for respondent No. 1. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ALAGIRISWAMI, J. In the election held to the Meghalaya Legis- lative Assembly fro!ll Songsak Constituency on 9th March 1972 the appellant was declared elected having received 819 votes as against 176 received by the 1st respondent and 98 1 votes received by the 2nd res- pondent. The appellant was a candidate set up by the All Party Hills Leaders Conference and the 1st respondent was supported by the Hill State People's Democratic Party (H.S.P.D.P.), though that party was not a recognised party. The symbol allotted to the 1st respondent by the Election Commission was "two leaves". The 1st respondent filed an election petition questioning the election of the appellant on the ground that he was guilty of a corrupt practice falling under section 123 ( 4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. That elec- tion petition having been allowed and appellant's election set aside by the High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura this appeal has been filed against the decision of the High Court. 802 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1975] 2 s.c.ll. The allegations in support of the petition were that on 3 days before A the election, that is on me 25th of r'eoruary 1':}72, tne 5,n uL man:h 1972 and the 7th of March 1972, the appellant distributed dummy ballot papers in three places, Bollonggiri, Uaggal Bazar and · Songsak · respectively. The dummy ballot papers marked as Ext. 4 in this caiSe contamed a "boat" as the e1ecuon symbol of the 1st reponde11Jt instead of the "two leaves" allotted to him as the election symbol. I he case , of the respondent was that this was a false statement reasonably calcu- B lated to prejudice the prospects of his election. The appellant's case was that the dummy ballot papers were got printed by A. M. Sangma, the Secretl\!Y of the A.P.H.L.C., that he took the bundle of dummy ballot papers from Tura, the headquart1~rs of the A.P.H.L.C. and when he was staying at the rest house in Bollonggiri he found out the mistake that had crept in the dummy ballot papers, that after consultation with the Chief Minister of Meghalaya, W.A. Sangma, who h.IS bei~n C examined as R.W. 12, he issued a coJTection statement marked as Ext. E, that the dummy ballot papers were not distribut
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.