SAMANT N. BALAKRISHNA ETC. versus GEORGE FERNANDEZ AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1969] 3 S.C.R. 603 · Decided: 12-02-1969 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HIDAYATULLAH · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 25 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

603 
SAMANT N. BALAKRISHNA ETC. 
v. 
GEORGE FERNANDEZ AND ORS. ETC. 
February 12, 1969 
[M. HlDAYATULLAH, C.J. AND G. K. MITTER, J] 
Rtpresentation of tile Ptople A.ct (43 of 1951), J's. 81, 86(5), 100 
(1) (b) 
100( 1 )(d)(ii) artd 123(4)-Difference b•tween 'material facts' 
and ·p~rticulars'-Whal amtrtdmtnts art pmnisslb/e after the p<rlod of 
/imitation-Candidatt's lack of btlief in stcttments made by agtnts I?, be 
,stab/ished-Differenct between s. lOO(l)(b) and s. 100(1)(d)(!1)-
Necessity of proof that candidate consented to specific corrupt practice-
<: Editor of newspaper attacking one ccndidate-When. can be dee'!'ed to be 
agent of a rival cartdidate-Consent of candidate, •I can be inferred-
Knowledge if suf!ic,.ent proof of consent-Statements in newspapers, 
weight of_:_Proof thct result of election was materially affected-Burden 
of proof. 
Under s. 81 of the Representation of the Peo,Ple Act, 1951, an election 
can be challenged by means of an election petition filed within 45 days 
D of the date of election, on the grounds specified in s. 100( 1). Section 100 
(l)(b) and (d)(li) deal with corrupt practices, and s. 123 sets out what 
shall be deemed to be corrupt practices. To establish the corrupt practice 
under s. 123(4) the election petitioner must prove: (a) the publication 
of a statement of fact by (i) a candidate, or (ii) his agent, or (iii) any 
other person with the consent of the candidate or his election aaent; (b) 
that the statement is false o'r the candidate believes it to be false or does 
not b~lieve it to be true; (c) that the statement refers to the personal 
E character and conduct of another candidate; and (d) that it is reasonably 
calculated to prejudice that other candidate's pro&pects of election. Under 
the Explanation to the section, the word 'agent' 
includes 
an 
election 
agent, a polling agent or any pe'rson who is held to have acted as an agent 
in connection with the election with the consent of the candidate. If the 
corrupt practice is committed by the returned candidate or his election 
agent, .under s. lOO(l)(b), the election is avoided without any further 
F condition being fulfilled, but if the petitioner 'relies on a corrupt practice 
committed by any other agent other than an election agent the petitioner 
must prove that it was committed with the consent of the returned can-
didate or his election agent as required bys. lOO(l)(b), or 
that the 
corrupt practice which was committed in the interests of the 
returned 
candidate materially affected tho result of the election in so far a' It con. 
ctrntd the ret11mtd rand/date. [617 A-B; 618 B-D] 
Section 83 requires that tho petition must contain a concise statement 
G of tho material facts on which tho petitioner relies and the fullest pouible 
particulars of the corrupt practice alleaod. 
'Material facts' and 'particu· 
Ian' may ovtrlap but the word 'material' shows that tho around of corrupt 
practice and the facts nee.nary to formulate a complete cause of action 
niust be stated. The func~lon ot the pa.fticulan is to present 81 full a 
picture of the cause of action as to make the opposite party understand 
the case he will have to meet. 
Under s. 86(5), if a corrupt practice is 
H alleged in the petition the particulars of suilb corrupt practice may be 
amended or am,Plifted for ensuring a fair and effective trial, that is, more 
and better particulars of the char~ may be .Riven later even after the 
period .o~ limitation; but if a ~rru~t prlctlce fs not previously allepc! in 
the petition, an amendment which will have the effect of introducina parti· 
604 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1969] 
S.C.R. 
culars of such a corrupt practice will not be permitted, after the period 
of limitation, because, it would be tantamount to the making of a fresh 
petition. 
Merely repeating the words of the statute does not amount to 
J. proper statement of material facts where the allegation of co'rn1pt prac-
tice is the making of a false statement. The false statement must appear 
in the petition. 
If the corrupt practice is the publication of an article in 
a ne\\ ~paper no incorporation of the contents by reference can be allow-
ed, fc1r, if a newspaper is not exhibited and only the date is mentioned, 
the material fact, namely, the exact offending portion of the newspaper, 
would not have been stated. If the charge is that c.n agent did something, 
it cannot be amplified by giving particulars of acts on the part of the 
candidate o

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