LexHARCHARAN SINGH versus MOHINDER SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
HARCHARAN SINGH
v.
MOHINDER SINGH & ORS.
May I, 1968
[J. C. SHAH AND Y. BHARGAVA, JJ.)
Reprr<r11w1io11 of
thr l'eop/e
Act
(43 of 1951 ) .. tr. 33(5) and
36(4)-Certified copy of <'<!rli{ic:arc filed hv candidate \\'lro is a voter
in diff.::re11t constituency fails to set
ou1 (igc, and house
number-I/
dcfecr sub_,·rn11tial to reject fl()/nination.
The nppi:llant filed his nomination paper for a se.;:ll to the Vidban
Sabha of a constituency different fron1 the one in v.•hich his name was
included as a voter.
With his nomin.;1tion
paper, the
appellant had
producl.-d an applicarion for a certified extract on the reverse of which
\\'as recorded a. certificate. containing relevant entries from the Voters·
list.
"fhe entries in certificate did not t;1\ly in all respects with
the
entries jn the voters' list. in that it failed to set out the 3J?C of he -appel-
lant and hi'i huusc number.
No objection to the nomination paper was
raised before the returning officer.
·rhc returning officer accepted the
nomination and held that the particular~
"'·ere. correct. and that
the
appcllant was over 15 years of age.
The appellant was declared elected.
"fhc first respondent. an
un~uccessful candidate,
challen.~ed the validity
of the election of the appellant on the ground that the appellant
had
failed to produce before the scrutiny of nomination paper. lhe electoral
roll or a certified copy of the relevant entries in the roll in
which
his
name wa-; included as voter as requir~d by s. 33 (5) of the Representa-
tion of the People Act.
The lli~h Court sci aside the election. In
appeal. this Court :
HELD : The appeal must be allowed.
A
B
c
D
E
The copy of the relevant entries frnm the electoral roll relating to
the appellant was defective.
But under s. 36( 4) the
returning
officer
is entitled to accept the nomination paper even if it he defective. if the
defect is not of a substantial character : indeed he is enjoined not to
reject ·the non1ination paper unlcs-; the defect is of a suhslantial character.
The details for indentifvin.J! the appellant as an elector \\·ere duly furnish·
ed.
His a~c- w;1s mentioned in the nomination paper. though it was not
F
10 be found in the certified copy produced by the appell.im.
No obicc·
tion \i.:as raised to the acceptance of the nomination paper on behalf of
the contesting candidate and his agents present at the scrutiny. The
returning ofT1ccr satisfied himself by personal inquiry th:-.t the ~ppcltant
\vas above the :lge of twenty·five and cornpctent to stand for election.
It wa.o; true that he did not come to the conclusion th:-it the defect in the
copy of the clt.-ctoral roll v;as of a substantial
char~ctcr. [204 G-H;
G
205 A-Bl
The decision of the returning officer in the matter is not final
~ind
in appropri:ltc cases it is open to the ('..()urt lo reach a different COf!·
c:u~ion in <i.n election petition.
Jn this case. the appellant was not ncgh-
~!...-nl nor .... ·as the
purity of election
proccs:. likely to he
affcct~d on
iiccount of the defects in the copv produced by the
appellant. The
defects in the certificate v.·erc not of :1 suhstantial character.
Therefore
the retl1;·nin" officer did not err in not
rcjcctin~ the nomination paper.
II
'
[204 B-C]
Sri Barn Ram v. Sh,.imati Prasnnni
& Ors. [1959]
SC.R.
1403,
referred 10.
•
•
-
•
..
•
-
HARCHARAN SINGH V. MOHINDER SINGH (Shah, J.)
19 9·
A
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1554 of.
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
1967.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated September 1, 1967
of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Election Petition No.
4 of 1967.
S. V. Gupte, Mehra Singh Chaddah and Harbans Singh, for
the appellant.
A. K. Sen, R. L. Kohli and J. C. Ta/war,
for respondent
No. I.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Shah, J. At the general elections held in February 1967 the
appellant polled the largest number of votes and was declared
elected to the Punjab Vidhan Sabha from the Zira Constitue'lcy .
The first respondent S. Mohinder Singh, who was a candidate at
the election, applied to tlle High Court of Punjab for setting.
a5ide the election of the appellant on the ground that the nomi-
nation of the appellant who was not a voter in the Zira Constitu-
ency was improperly accepted by the Returning Officer. for the
appellant had failed to file before the scrutiny a copy of the elec-
toral roll or the relevant part thereofExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.