HARDWARI LAL versus KANWAL SINGH

Citation: [1972] 2 S.C.R. 742 · Decided: 07-11-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. HEGDE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

742 
HARDW ARI LAL 
v. 
KANWAL SINGH 
December 1, 1971 
[K. S. HEGDE, A. N. GROVER AND A. N. RAY, JJ.] 
Representation of the People Act. 1951 s. 123(1)-Corrupt practice 
of obtainini assistance etc. from a Govern~ent servant-What constitutes 
-When material particulars aFe not supplied the petition 
must be dis-
missed. 
The appellant was declared elected to the Hary'J.na Legislative Assem-
bly from )lahadurgarh 
constituency. 
The respondent challenged 
the 
election on various grounds. In para 16 of the election petition it was 
alleged that the appellant was guilty of the corrupt pmctice mentioned in 
s. 123 (7) .of the Representation of the People Act. 1951 inasmuch as he 
had wfitten letters to six Government servants seeking their assistance in 
tie election. The High Court framed Issue No. 5 to deal with this allega-
tion. The appellant applied to the High Court for further particulars to be 
supplied by the respondent in support of his allegations in para 16 but the 
application was rejected. The High Court held the appellant guilty of the 
said corrupt practice and declared his election void. The appellant appealed 
to this Court by special leave. 
The question that fell for 
consideration 
was whether the petition was not maintainable in view of the appellant's 
contention that cnaterial particulars in support of the allegation of corrupt 
practice which was the subject-matter of Issue 
No. 5 had not been 
supplied. 
HELD : The different expressions used in s. 123(7). namely, obtain-
ing, ·procuring', 'abetting· or atten1pting to obtain or procure are various 
forms of corrypt practice. It has to be found as to whether the allegation 
of obtaining assistance amounts to an allegation of fact. It is well settled 
that general expressions liKe "fraudulently', 'negligently' or 'maliciously' in 
pleading; do not amount to allegations of fact. [746 HJ 
Jn the present t\ase the allegations in para 16 of the election petition 
did. not amount to any statement of material fact of corrupt practice. ll 
was not stated a_s to what kind or form of assistance was obtained or pro-
cured or attempted to be obtai-ned or procured. 
It was not stated from 
whom the particular -type --of assistance was obtained or attempted to be 
obtained or Jlrocured. 
It was not stated in what 
manner 
the 
assis-
tance was for the furtherance of the prospect of the election. 
The grave-
men of the chaige of coirupt practic.! is obtaining or attempting to obtain 
or procure any ao;;sistance other than the giving of a vote. 
In the absence 
of any suggestion as to w.hat the assistance was the election petition was 
lacking in the most vital and essential material fact to furnish a cause of 
action. 
It did not ~mount to an election petition on grounds mentioned 
;n ' 
123(7) of the Act and was therefore liable to be dismissed. [750 
F-G] 
The fact that s. 83 under which material particulars are required to be 
supplied is not pientioned in s. 86 as one of the sections non-compliance 
with which must result in dismissal of the petition carinot lead to a con-
trarv conclusion. 
Under s. 87 of the Act everv election petition shall be 
tried by the High C'-0urt as n~''1.rlv ac; may be in 3ccordance v.-ith the proce-
dure applicable under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 to the trial of 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
" 
HARDWARI LAL V. KANWAL SINGH (Ray, J.) 
743 
A 
suits. 
A suit which does not furnish cauce of ,.ction can be dismissed. 
[750H-751A] 
Samat N. Balakrishna etc.I George Fernandex & Ors., ~1969] 3 S.C.R. 
603, Manubhai Nandlal Amersey v. Popat/a/ Manila/ Joshi & Ors., L1969]! 
3 S.C.R. 217 and Hc.rish Chandra Bajpai & Anr. v. Triloki Singh 12 
E. L.R. 461, applied. 
B 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 129 of 
c 
E 
F 
G 
H 
1971. 
Appeal under s. 116-A of the Representation of the People 
Act, 1951 from the Judgment and Order dated D~cember 24, 1970 
of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Election Petition No. I 
. Of 1970. 
Appellant appeared in person. 
Anand Swaroop, Janardan Sharma and S. K. Nandy, for the· 
respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Ra), J. 
This is an appeal under section 116-A of the Repre·· 
sentation of the People Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) 
from the judgmeint and order dated 24 December, 1970 of the 
High Court of Punjab and Haryana setting aside the election of 
the appellant. 
The appellant was declared elected to the Haryana Legislative 
Assembly from Bahadurgarh Constituen

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