LexKANWAR LAL GUPTA versus AMAR NATH CHAWLA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H KANWAR LAL GuPTA v. AMAR NATH CHAWLA & ORS.· October 3, 1974 [P. N. BHAOWATI AND R. S. SARKAlUA J.J.] 259 , . · Representation of the People Act (43 of 1951) ss. 77(1) and 123(6)-&· penses incurred by party sponsoring candidate in excess of the prescribed limit-If aild when a corrupt practice-Reform of election law suggested. ,. Section 77(1) of the Representation of the People Act, ·1951, provides that every candidate at an election shall, either by himself or by his election agent, keep a separate and correct account of all expenditure,· in connection with the election, Incurred or· authorised by him or by his election agent between the date of the pubJi. cation of the notification calling the election and the date of declaration of result thereof, botli dates inclusive; and s. 77(3) says that the total of the said expenditure shall not exceed such amount as may be preScribed. Tho objects of enacting a ceiling on the expenditure which may legitimately .be incurred in connection with an election are : .. (a) It should be open to any individual or to any political parcy, however small, to be able to contest an election on a footing of equality with any other indi• vidual or political party, however rich and well financed it may be, and no indivi· dual or political party should be able to secure an advantage over others by reason of its superior financial strength. The democratic process can function efficiently and effectively, for the benefit of the common good and reach ·out the benefits of &elf-government to the commo.n man only if it brings about a participatory demo- cracr in which every man, howsoever lQwly or. humble he may be, should be able to participate on a footing. of eq_uality witll others. Now money plays an important part in the successful prose<;11tion of an election campaign by buying advertisement and canvassing facilitieS, by providing the means for quick and speedy communi· cations and movements and sophisticated campaign techniques, and also by the emploxroent of paid workers where volunteers 1¥re found to be insufficient. There- fore, if one political party or indiVidual has larger resources available to it than another the former would certainly, under the present system Of conducting elect· ions, have an .advantage over the latter in t~e electoral process. [265C-F] · · · (b) The other objective at limiting expenditure is to eliminate, as far as pos- sible, the influence of big money in electoral process. If there were no limit on expenditure political parties would go all out for eollecting contributions and obvi· ously the largest contributions would be from the rich and the affluent who consti· tute but a fraction of the electorate. It is likely that some elected representatives would tend to share. the views of the wealthy supporters of their political parcy, either because of shared backj!fOund and association, increased access or subtle influences which condition their thinking. In such an event, the result would be 'that though ostensibly the political parties which receive such contributions may · profess an ideology acceptable to the common man, they would in effect and substance be the representatives, of a certain economic class, and their policies and decisions would be shaped by the interests of that economic class. Persons of a particular class wl'.lo have eitclusive governmental power, even if they tried to act objectively, would tend to overlook the interests of other classes or view those interests dif. ferently. To this natural tendency may be added the fact that office bearers and elected representatives may quite possibly be inclined, though unconsciously and imperceptibly, to espouse the policies and decisions that will attract campaign con- tributions from affluent individuals and groups. Pre-election donations would be likely to operate as post-election promises resulting ultimately in the casualty of the interest of the common man. The small man's chance is the essence of Indian - democracy and th .. at would be stultified if large contributions from rich and affluent . Individuals or groups are not divorced. from the electoral process. 2-M255SupCit7S [266E-P, 267C·D, E-P, o-Hl 260 SUPREME, COURT Rl!POR.TS [1975) 2 S._Q.R,, Under &, 123(6) not only fo the lnc11rrlng of expendlture In excess of the pres. crlbed limit a corrupt practice but also the author/1/111 ot such expenditure. Autho·
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.