NARBADA PRASAD versus CHHAGAN LAL AND ORS.

Citation: [1969] 1 S.C.R. 499 · Decided: 30-07-1968 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HIDAYATULLAH · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
• 
G 
H 
499 
NARBADA PRASAD 
v. 
CHHAGAN LAL AND ORS. 
July 30 1968 
[M. HIDAYATULLAH, C.J., AND A. N. GROVER, J.] 
Representation of the People Act (43 of 1951), ss. 33(5), 116-i.4 
and 123-Compliance with s. 33(5), what ls-Threatening voters that if 
they voted for rival candidate they would be committing the •in of 
gobatya-Jj election offence-Assessment of evidence by this Court und•r 
s. 116A. 
The election of the appellant to the Madhya 
Pradesh Legislative 
Assembly from Khategaon constitnency was challenged on two gronnds : 
(I) That the nomination paper of one of the contesting candidates was 
wrongly rejected by the Returning Officer; and ( 2) that there was a 
violation of s. 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, in that 
the appellant and his election agent made speeches, wherein they stared, 
that Congress had not abolished cow slaughter in India and that to vote 
for the Congress thereforer was to commit the sin of gohatya. The trial 
Judge of the High Court allowed ·the petition on both the grounds. 
In appeal to this Court under s. 116-A the Act, 
HELD : (I) The candidate whose nomination paper was 
rejeeted 
was not registered as a votelr in the Eleetoral Roll relating to Khategaon 
eonstituency but to a different constituency. Under s. 33(5) of the Act, 
he had to produoe before the Returning Officer at the time of serutiny, 
a copy of the Eleetoral Roll of that constituency, or of the relevant part 
thereof, or a certified copy of the relevant ent!ry in such Roll, or s_hould 
have filed any of those documents earlier with his nomination paper. He 
did not do any of these but instead, filed with his nomination paper a 
certificate giving only a gist of an entry from the Electoral Roll of the 
other constitnency, and that too from an officer who was not prOTed 
to have the authority to issue a celrtified copy of the Electoral Roll. The 
provisions of the section were thus not complied with and the Court bad 
no power to dispense with the requirement. 
Therefore, the rejection of 
the nomination paper of the candidate, by the Returning Officer. was 
justified and the trial Judge erred in holding that it was wrongly rejected 
(501 F-H; 502 A-EJ 
(2) By stating that if the voters voted fdr congress they would be 
committing the sin of gohatya, the appellant and his agent attempted 
to induce the voter8 to believe that they would become objects of divine 
displeasure or spiritual censure and thus committed an election offence 
under s. 123 of the Act. [506 G; 507 BJ 
Since the witnesses who spoke about the $peeches were believed by 
the trial Judge not on the probabilities of the case, but, on his observation 
of thei'.r demeanour this Court would be slow to depart from the trial 
Judge's assessment of the evidence. 
According to that evidence. the 
voters were reminded that they would be committing the sin of goluttya. 
Since the cow is venerated in this Countcy and it is also beleved that 
11ohatya is one of the car~inal sins, such a reminder would be equivalent 
to reminding them that they would' be objects of divine displeasure of 
ipiritual censure. 
The case therefore fell within s. 123(2) (ii) and the 
'500 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1969] I S.C.11.. . 
trial Judge was right in holding that the election. of the returned candidate 
~bould be set aside. (505 D-E; 506 HJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1968. 
Appeal under section 116-A of the Representation of the 
People Act 1951 from the judgment and order dated November 
30, 1967 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench 
in Election Petition No. 5 of 1967. 
S. V. Gupte, R. K. Vijayavargiya and S. S. Khanduja, for 
the appellant. 
V. K. Sanghi, G. L. Sangh; and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for mt-
pondent No. I. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Hidayatullah, C. J. 
This is an appeal against the judgment, 
November 30, 1967, of a learned Single Judge of the High Court 
of Madhya Pradesh at Indore setting aside the election of the ap-
pellant to the Khategaon Legislative Assembly Constituency No. 
259. 
The facts on which the petition was based and the judg-
ment of the High Court has been rested, may now be stated. 
At the last General Election to the Madhya Pradesh Legisla-
tive Assembly from the Khategaon Constituency there were five 
contesting candidates. They were the appellant and respondents 
2 to 5. The appellant received 9622 votes as against the second 
respondent who obtained 803

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