K. PRABHAKARAN versus P. JAYARAJAN

Citation: [2005] 1 S.C.R. 296 · Decided: 11-01-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.C. LAHOTI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 7 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
K. PRABHAKARAN 
I'. 
P. JAY ARAJAN 
JANUARY 11, 2005 
B [R.C. LAHOTI, CJ., SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, B.N. 
c 
D 
SRIKRISHNA AND G.P. MATHUR, JJ.) 
Representation of the People Act, 1951: 
Section 8(3)-Disqualification under-Determination of-Subsequent 
appei'late judgment having bearing on the conviction and sentence of the 
candidate-Effect of-On disqualification-Held: the disqualification has to 
be determined with reference to date of election and date of scrutiny of 
nomination paper and not the date of judgment in an election petition or in 
appeal thereagainst-Appe/late judgment of a date subsequent to the date of 
nomination or election would not have the effect of wiping out the 
disqualification from a back date-Sections 100(/)(a) and (dl(i), 67A and 
36(2)(a). 
·Section 8(3)-Term of imprisonment of 2 years-Determination of-For 
incurring disqualification-Held: For determining the term of imprisonment, 
E in case of consecutive sentences, the aggregate period of punishment for all 
the offences and in case of concurrent sentences, the longest of the several 
terms of imprisonment is to be taken into consideration-In order to attract 
disqualification, it is not necessary that the term must be in respect of one 
single offence-The provisions of Section 8 have to be construed in harmony 
p 
with the provisions ofCr.P.C.-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 
31. 
Section 8(4)-Savingfrom disqualification-Applicability of-Held: The 
saving is available only so long as the House continues and the candidate 
continues to be member of the House-It ceases to apply if the House is 
G dissolved or the candidate ceases to be member of the House. 
H 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Article 14-Candidates at election--C/assification as 'member of House' 
and 'non-member of House' for the purpose of disqualification-Propriety of 
296 
K. PRABHAKARAN v. I' . .IA YARA.IAN 
297 
such classification-Held: such classification is reasonable and based on well A 
laid down differentia and has nexus with public purpose sought to be achieved-
Representation of the People Act, 1951-Sections 8(3) and (4). 
Interpretation of Statute: 
Interpretation of provision of law and pronouncement on the construction B 
of statutory provision-Held: While interpreting and pronouncing it should be 
kept in mind that the view would be applied to myriad situations-Interpretation 
-~ 
resulting in conji1sion, anomaly, uncertainty and practical difficulties has to 
be avoided 
I ·y. 
Legal Fiction-Meaning and use of-Held: Legal fiction presupposes C 
existence of not-existent state of facts and then works out the consequence$ 
flowing from those state of facts-Since it is created only for some definite 
purpose, it should be limited to that purpose-Stretching it beyond that 
legitimate field would amount to an illegitimate extension of the purpose of 
the legal fiction. 
D 
Words and Phrases: 
Expression "Any offence" in the context of Section 8(3) of Representation 
of People Act, 1951. 
The questions which arose for consideration before this Court were: 
(1) Whether an appellate judgment of a date subsequent to the date 
of election and having a bearing on conviction of a candidate and sentence 
E 
of imprisonment passed on him would have the effect of wiping out 
disqualification from a back date if a person consequent upon his F 
conviction for any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 
2 years was disqualified from filing nomination and contesting the election 
on the dates of nomination and election? 
(2) What is the meaning to be assigned to the expression-" A person 
convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than G 
2 years" as employed in sub-section (3) of Section 8 of the Representation 
of the People Act, 1951? Is it necessary that the term of imprisonment 
for not less than 2 years must be in respect of one single offence to attract 
the disqaualification? 
(3) What is the purport of sub-section (4) of Section 8 of the Act; H 
298 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2005] I S.C.R. 
A whether the protection against disqualification conferred by sub-section 
(4) on a member ofa House would continue to apply though the candidate 
had ceased to be a member of Parliament or Legislature of a State on the 
date of nomination or election? 
B 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: Per lahoti, CJ. (for himself and for Patil, Srikrishna and 
Mathur, JJ.): 
1.1. The question of qualification or disquali

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