LAKSHMI RAMAN ACHARYA versus CHANDAN SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [1977] 2 S.C.R. 412 · Decided: 13-12-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
412 
LAKSHMI RAMAN ACHARYA 
v. 
CHANDAN SINGH & ORS. 
December 13, 1976 
[Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, P. K. GOSWAMI AND A. C. GUPTA, JJ.] 
Representation of. the .Peop/~ Act, 1951-S. 123(2)(3) and (3A)-Corrupt 
P.ractzce-Vague denials m wmten statements-If could be taken as admis-
swns-
In the election to the. State Assembly the first respondent was declared 
elected. . The appellant, who was one of the defeated candidates, impugned 
the elect10n on the ground that the first respondent was guilty of adopting 
corrupt practices within the meaning of s. 123 (2), (3) and (3A) of the Repre-
sentation of the People Act, 1951. It was alleged that (i) to get support of 
the Muslim voters of a village, the first respondent offered a bribe for the 
construction of a school building for Muslim boys in the village and (ii) in 
another village with predominant Muslim voters, he paid a big sum of money 
for the construction of a mosque. The first respondent in his written statement 
denied the .a!legations as absurd and baseless and denied in toto the allegation 
of bribery. The High Conn dismissed the petition. 
On appeal to this Court it was contended that the allegations against the 
respondent must be taken to have been admitted in view of his 
vague and 
evasive denial. 
· 
Dismissing the appeal, 
HELD : The well settled principles governing election disputes are : 
( 1) proceedings arising out of election petitions are quasi-criminal 
in 
character and the allegations made in the petition must be proved beyond 
reasonable doubt; (2) in an appeal under s. 116A of the Act the Supreme 
Court will not interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the trial court 
except for very strong and cogent reasons; and (3) it is unsafe in an election 
case to accept oral evidence at its face value without looking for assurances: 
from some surer circumstances or unimpeachable documents. 
[413F] 
Rahim Khan v. Khurshid Ahmed, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 643, 656, followed. 
(i) In the instant case the contention that donation to public or charitable 
~
institutions could not amount to bribery is a legal plea asserting that even on 
' . 
the staEments made in the election petition the allegation of bribery was 
not 
sustainable. 
The allegation of bribery was denied by the first respondent in 
toto and as false and baseless. [4180] 
(ii) The story that the first respondent visited the village at midnight and' 
doled out money to a crowd of Muslim voters could not be true. The central· 
figures in the dispute over the money had not been examined by the appellant 
and the letters produced by him to strengthen oral evidence relating to the inci-
dents were clearly brought into existence for the purpose of election petition. 
[419GJ 
(iii) As regards the amount alleged to. )lave been paiq for the c~~struction 
of a mosque one of the witnesses exammed deposed without receivmg 
any 
summons from the court. The appellant had no personal knowledge of the 
facts alleged in support of the case of bribery. The. H~gh Cou;t rightly h~ld 
that the letter which the appellant addressed to the _Disti;i,ct. Magis\rate contam-
ing vague references to the allegations. had ~e.en wntten w!th a view to crea~~ 
some sort of evidenee in case the election pel!!Ion was neces:sitated to be filed . 
[420CI 
LAKSHMI RAMAN v. CHANDAN SINGH (Gupta,!.) 
413 
CML APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 128 of 1976. 
A 
(From the Judgment and Order dated 10-12-1975 of the Allahabad 
High Court in Election Petition No. 35/74). 
G. N. Dikshit, M. V. Goswami, S. V. Goswami and 
Ambrish 
i 
Kumar, for the Appellant. 
L. M. Shinghvi, Pramod Swarup and S. K. Verma, for Respon-
dent No. 1. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B 
'GUPTA, J.-The appellant was one of the eight contestants from 
Mat Constituency No. 365 in District Mathura in the Uttar Pradesh 
Legislative Assembly elections held in 1974. February 24 and 26, 
C 
1974 were the dates when poll was taken and the result was declared 
.on February 28, 1974. The first respondent who was sponsored by 
Bhartiya Kranti Dal, it will be referred to as B. D. hereinafter, was 
elected securing 33565 votes. 
The appellant who came next was a 
nominee of the Congress party; he polled 20731 votes, 12,834 votes 
less than the successful candidate. On April 14, 1974 the appellant 
presented an election petition in the Allahabad High Court calling in 
D 
question the election of the first respondent alleging that he was g

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