LexSHRI BABURAO PATEL & ORS. versus DR. ZAKIR HUSAIN & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G H SHRI BABURAO PATEL & ORS. v. DR. ZAKIR HUSAIN & ORS. November 7, 1967 JK. N: WANCHOO, C.J., R. S. BACHAWAT, V. RAMASWAMI, G. K. MITTER AND K. S. HEGDE, JJ.] Constitution of J11dia, Arts. 58, 84 a11d 324-Scope o/~andidates to Presidential Ofjice--Oath if necessary for eligibility. Presidential & Vice-Presideniial Elections Act (30 of 1952), s. 18- L1n.due lnfluence--Canvassing by Pri111e Minister and Minister u1'10 is Chief Whip of Party, if amounts undue influence. As a result of the Presid·ontial election held in May, 1967, respondent No. 1 was declared elected. The petitioners challengod the election on the following two grounds, namely (i) Art. 58( I) (c) required that a person to be eligibl·o for election as President must be qualified for election as a member of the House of People. After the Sixteenth Amendment, under Art. 84(a). it was necessary for a person standing for election to either House of Parliament to take an oath in the fonn prescribed in the Third Schedule, TherefoN, a person standing for election as President had also to take a similar oath: since the respondent had not taken the oath he was not eligible for election. (ii) As (a) the Prime J\ilinister addressed a letter to all electors commending res~ pondent No. I and requesting them to vote for him; (b) the Prime Minister deputed Ministers to various State Capitals to make doubly certain that respondent-...No. 1 was elected; (c) a Minister who was also the chief whip of the Congress party wrote two letters to all members of his. party in Parliament and signed them as Chief Whip, explaining the situation with respect to the. election and requesting them to come to Delhi and corrtact him and also requesting th·em to give the first pre- ference to respondent No. 1 and not to mark the second or any other preference in favour of the candidates; and (d) the Chief Minister of Maharashtra had briefed members of the Legislative Assembly as to how and for whom to vote, the result of the election has materially been affected by vndue inftuenoo. HELD : The petition must be dismissed. (i) The had not to President. candidate standing for election to the office of the President tak·~ any oath before becoming eligible for election as A comparison of Art. 58 with Art. 84 as it stood· before· the amend- ment shows that cl. (a) of Art. 84, corresponded to cl. (a) of Art. 58 ( 1). as both provided that the respective candidates should be citizeris of India. It was therefore, not necessary to go to cl. (a) of Art. 84 for the purpose of finding out whether a person w;.ts eligible for election as President for the purpose of citizenship for that partcof cl: (a). of Art. H-1 was specifically provided for in cl. (a) of Art. 58( 1). Similarly, cl. Cb) of Art. 84 corresponded to cl. (b) of Art. 58(1), with this Jiffci-ence that it provided a special qualificati9n as. ·10. ~tb"e and therefore· :J 34 SUl'R[ME COIJRT REPORTS [1968] 2 SCR one woul<l not have to go to cl. (b) of Art. 84 for the purpose of finding out the qualification as to age. Clause (c) of Art .. 58( 1) clearly cor- responded to cl. (c) of Art. 84 and reading them together it would follow lh~t a. person standing for election act Presid:nt would _require such qualifications as may be prescribed in that behalf bv or under any law made by Parliament. Further as cl. (c) of Art. SS( J) Jays down that a pe.rson . standing for Presidential election has to be qualifL~d for ~embe.rsh1p. ot the House of the People, Art. 102 (which Jays down d;squahficat1ons for members of Parliament) would also be attracted ex..:cpt in so far ac;, there is a special provision contained in Art. 58(2). Thus cl. (c) or Art. 58(1) woul<l bring in such qualifications for mcm· her.; of the House of the People as may as prescr'bc<l bv Jaw by Parlia· ment. as required by Art. 84(c). It w!IJ by its own force bring in Art. 102 of the Con~titution, for that Article Jays Jo"'" certain Jisqualifica- tions "'hich a presiJcot1al candi<lat-~ mu~t not have for he has to he eligible for election as " member of the House of the Peoplo. But it is clear that what is vrov;ded in cl. (a) an<l (bl of Art. 58( 1) must be taken from there and it is not necessary travel to els. (a) and (h) of Art. 84 in the matter of cit:zcnship and of age of the prc,idcntial candi-· <late. Clause< (a) and (h) of Art. 58(1) havin~ made a specific provi- 'ion in
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.