QUAMARUL ISLAM versus S.K. KANTA AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] 1 S.C.R. 210 · Decided: 21-01-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, R.M. SAHAI, A.S. ANAND

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
QUAMARUL ISLAM 
v. 
S.K. KANTA AND ORS. 
JANUARY 21, 1994 
B 
[S.RATNAVEL PANDIAN, R.M.SAHAI AND DR.AS.ANAND, JJ.) 
Representation of People Act, 1951 : Sections 123(2), (3), (3A.), (4) 
and 124(7)-Election Petition filed against returned candidate-Allegation of 
corrupt practices-f'roof of-Failure to adduce admissible and reliable 
C evidence-Election cannot be set aside on mere probabilities-Trial conducted 
in a very casual manner-Absence of Rules in this regard-High Court to 
frame 1Ules for proper trial of election petitions-Suggestion given to Kamataka 
High Court. 
Practice & Procedure : Election Petition--Trial of-Affidavit in support 
D of Petition-f'ennitted to be filed after the arguments-Such a practice un-
known to civil or election law-Hence Deprecated. 
The appellant was the returned candidate from 10 Gulbarga As· 
sembly constituency in 1989 and Respondent No.1 was his nearest rival. 
E 
He filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant on 
grounds of corrupt practices. It was alleged that the Indian Union Muslim 
League (IUML) and Muslim Youth League appealed for votes on the 
grounds of religion through advertisements in an Urdu newspaper seeking 
votes for the appellant; that the person appointed by the appellant as 
convenor of Muslim Youth League(MYL) later became his election agent; 
F 
that speeches were delivered by the appellant seeking votes on grounds of 
religion; and that the said newspaper, apart from the messages, also 
contained a sacred religious symbol, written in Urdu, meaning 'voice of the 
prophet'. 
The appellant denied the allegations asserting that be was a can-
G didate of Muslim League and that he had nothing to do with the IDML or 
MYL and that his election agent was not the person as alleged in the 
petition, but a different person. As regards the messages and advertise-
ments inserted in the Urdu newspapers, appellant stated that they neither 
originated nor sponsored, or published at his instance. He also denied that 
H he had delivered any speeches as alleged or that he had made any appeal 
210 
QUAMARULISLAM v. S.K KANTA 
211 
on ground of religion at all. 
The matter was heard by a Single Judge of the High Court who held 
that the appellant was directly responsible for committing corrupt prac-
tices under Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and 
set aside the election of the appellant. Hence this appeal. 
On behalf of the appellant, it was contended that the pleadings in 
the election petition were so vague, lacking in material facts and par-
ticulars besides being frivolous and vexatious that the same did not give 
A 
B 
rise to any triable issue at all, and therefore the petition ought to have 
been dismissed. Besides, the evidence relied upon was inadmissible and C 
unreliable. 
On behalf of the respondent, it was contended that having failed to 
raise any objection about the alleged defects at the initial stage and having 
faced the trial, it was not open to the appellant now to urge that the defects 
in the pleadings should have resulted in the dismissal of the election D 
petition at this belated stage. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The trial judge was not justified in setting aside the 
election of the appellant on the basis of inadmissibly and unreliable E 
evidence. The election petitioner has failed to connect the returned can-
didate with the commission of the alleged corrupt practices either by 
himself or through his election agent or by any other agent or person with 
his consent or with the consent of his election agent through any admissible 
and reliable evidence. (257-D, E] 
F 
2. A careful perusal of the allegations of corrupt practice under 
S.123( 4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 shows that it is not 
even asserted by the election petitioner that the statement alleged to have 
been made by the returned candidate on 1.11.1989 about the non-signing 
of the passport forms of certain people in the constituency was false to the G 
knowledge of the returned candidate or that he made it without believing 
that statement to be true. There was, thus, no allegation whatsoever which 
satisfied the basic requirements of Section 123(4) of the Act. It was not 
even alleged by.the election petitioner that the returned candidate made a 
statement of fact which was false to his knowledge or which he did not H 
212 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1994] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
believe to be true and in the ab

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