LexRANGILAL CHOUDHURY versus DAHU SAO AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 401 had two incised wounds and one punctured wound '961 and two abrasions. The mere fact that Kartar Singh Rarta• Singh was not connected with the dispute about the plot of v. land is not sufficient to hold that he could not have state of Punjab formed a common intention with the others, when he went with them armed. The conviction under s. 302 Raghuba. and s. 307 read with s. 149, can be converted into one Dayal J. under s. 302 and s. 307 read with s. 34, Indian Penal Code. We therefore see no force in this appeal and accord- ingly dismiss it. Appeal dismissed. RANGILAL CHOUDHURY v. DAHU SAO AND OTHERS (P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO, K. C. DAS GUPTA and T. L. VENKATARAMA AIYAR, JJ.) Election-Defect in the nomination paper-If of a substantial character-Representation uf the People Act, I95' (No. LKIII of I95I), s. 33, sub-s. (4). The appellant was elected as a member of the Bihar Legis- lative Assembly in a bye-election from the Dhanbad constitu- ency by a majority of votes while the nomination paper of the respondent was rejected by the Returning Officer on the ground that the re>'pondent's proposer had nominated him for election from the Bihar and not Dhanbad assembly constituency inas- much as in the nomination paper he wrote the ~·ord "Bihar" before the v.'ords "assembly constitU:ency" instead of the \Vord "Dhanbad". This defect arose out of a mistake in the Hindi printed form of the nomination paper which did not exactly conform to the form prescribed by the Rules. In an election petition by the respondent the Election Tribunal held that his nomination paper was rightly rejected but on appeal the High Court held that it was improperly rejected. On appeal by spe- cial leave, Held, that in view of the mistake that occurred in the April z6. Rangilal Choudhury v. Daku Sao 402 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1962] printing of the form and in view of the fact that the name of the constituency for which the election was being held was already in the heading, the defect in the filling up of the form which resulted from a mistake of the proposer in putting the word "Bihar" instead of the word "Dhanbad" was not of a sub- stantial character as contemplated under s. 33 of the Represen- tation of the People Act, 195I. Held, further, that the defect arising out of the fact that columns nos. 2 and 5 were not properly filled was not of a sub- stantial character as the Returning Officer had no difficulty in checking that the proposer and the candidate were voters on the electoral rolls. Karnail Singh v. Election Tribunal, Hissar, [1954] IO E.L.R. 189, relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1961. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 25, 1960, of the Patna High Court in Election Appeal No. 4 of 1959. N. C. Chatterjee, D. P. Singh, M. K. Ramamurthy, R. K. Garg and S. C. Agarwal, for the appellant. D. Goburdhan, for respondent No. I. 1961. April 26. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by wanchoo J. WANCHOO, J.-This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Patna High Court in an election matter. The brief facts necessary for present purposes are these. There was a bye-election held on December 21 and 22, 1958, to fill up a vacancy in the Bihar Legislative Assembly from the Dhanbad consti- tuency. Nomination papers for the same were to be filed on or before November 8, 1958. A large number of persons filed their nomination papers on or before that date and among them were the appellant Rangi- lal Choudhury and the respondent Dahu Sao. In the present appeal we are only concerned with these two. The nomination paper of the respondent was rejected by the returning officer after scrutiny on November 11, 1958. The bye.election was duly held and the appellant was declared elected by a majority of votes. Thereafter the respondent filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant on a large 2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 403 number of grounds. In the present appeal we are only concerned with one of the grounds that the nomina- tion paper of the respondent was improperly rejected. The appellant's contention in this connection was that the nomination paper was rightly rejected. The elec- tion tribunal held that the nomination paper was rightly rejected and thereafter dismissed the petition. The respondent went in appeal to the High
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.