LexGOVIND SINGH versus HARCHAND KAUR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c [2010] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 348 GOVIND SINGH v. HARCHAND KAUR (Civil Appeal No. 2719 of 2006) NOVEMBER 22, 2010 [J.M. PANCHAL AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.) Representation of the People Act, 1951: s. 123(1) r/w s. 100 (1) (b) ands. 83 - Corrupt practice - Election of returned candidate as MLA to the State legislative Assembly from reserved constituency - Challenged to on the ground of indulgence in corrupt practice - High Court declaring election as void and set aside the same - D Sustainability of - Held: Not sustainable - Any act performed by a candidate prior to his becoming a candidate would not amount to indulgence in corrupt practice - Corrupt practice of bribery would be attracted only if such act had been committed by a candidate after filing of his nomination paper - However, if any illegal act was done by a candidate prior to E his filing of nomination which was not within the legal discharge of duty, it would amount to corrupt practice ....: It cannot be said that the election petition was fit to be rejected for the lack of material facts and material particulars - Returned candidate F resigned as Social Security Minister and thereafter, filed nomination - Distribution of pension to old age/widow! handicapped persons by returned candidate in discharge of official duty as Minister as also appointment of some ladies as Anganwadi workers when the returned candidate was Social Security Minister, before filing his nomination, would G not amount to indulgence in corrupt practice - Also he cannot be instrumental in appointing applicants as Anganwadi workers when he had ceased to be a Minister and had filed his nomination - As regards distribution of pension H 348 GOVIND SINGH v. HARCHAND KAUR 349 immediately prior to the date of polling, the competent A authorities did not support the case of defeated candidate that the returned candidate committed any illegality - Evidence of the competent authorities for distribution of pension- independent witness more reliable than the prosecution witnesses-interested witnesses - Charge of corrupt practice B was to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and not merely by preponderance of probabilities - Evidence relied upon by the High Court cannot be held to be of such probative value - Witnesses relied upon by the High Court not credible - Thus, order passed by the High Court set aside - Election c laws - Evidence - Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 - r. 94- A. Election laws: Election of a returned candidate - Challenged - Allegation of corrupt practice - Onus of proof - Held: Charge of corrupt practice is in nature of a quasi- D . criminal charge - Heavy onus lies on the election petitioner seeking the setting aside of the election of a successful candidate and, thus, he has to make out a clear case for such relief both in the pleadings and at the trial - Onus of proof is not discharged merely on preponderance of probabilities but E the standard of proof required is akin to that of proving a criminal or a quasi-criminal charge - Evidence Act, 1872. Words and phrases: Material facts and material particulars - Meaning of. F The election of MLA to the State Legislative Assembly was to be held on 13.02.2002. The appellant resigned as Social Security Minister on 12.01.2002 and became a candidate for the election on 23.01.2002 by filing his nomination as an independent candidate. G Thereafter, the appellant was declared elected. The respondent-defeated candidate filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant-returned candidate alleging illegal acts of omission and H 350 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010) 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A commission at the instance of the appellant which amounted to indulgence in corrupt practice against him within the meaning of Section 123(1) read with Section 100 (1) (b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court declared the election of the appellant as B MLA to the Punjab Legislative Assembly from the reserved Assembly Constituency as void and set aside the same. Therefore, the appellant filed the instant appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court C HELD: 1. In view of the unsatisfactory analysis of the evidence and erroneous approach of the High Court while recording the finding on the issue of corrupt practice, no conclusive inference could be drawn that the respondent-defeated candidate who had secured only D third position in the election s
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.