SHRI BALWAN SINGH versus SHRI LAKSHMI NARAIN & OTHERS

Citation: [1960] 3 S.C.R. 91 · Decided: 23-02-1960 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUVNESHWAR PRASAD SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

... 
3 S.O.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
91 
of the Act of 1913 may be continued after the repeal 
of that Act, it follows that the .;District Judge of 
Poona continues to have jurisdiction to entertain 
it. If it were not so, then s. 6 would become infruc-
tuous. 
For these reasons we think that the appeal J'hust 
fail and it is therefore dismissed with costs. 
Appeal dismissed. 
SHRI BALWAN SINGH 
v. 
SHRI LAKSHMI NARAIN & OTHERS 
(B. P. SINHA, O.J., JAFER IMAM, A. K. SARKAR, 
K. N. WANCHOO AND J. 0. SHAH, JJ). 
Election Petition-Corrupt Practice-Hiring vehicle for con-
veyance of electors-Pleadings-Particulars of contract of hiring, if 
necessary-Representation of the People Act, z95z, (43 of z95z), 
ss. 83(z)(b), 90(3) and z23(5). 
The first respondent filed an election petition for an order 
that the election of the appellant be declared void on the ground 
that the appellant had committed the corrupt practice under 
s. 123(5) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, in that 
he had hired a tractor for conveying women electors from their 
houses to places of polling and back. By an amendment applica-
tion the first respondent gave particulars about the conveying of 
voters, but he did not give any particulars regarding the contract 
of hiring nor did the appellant ask for such particulars. At the 
trial the first respondent led evidence in respect of the contract 
of hiring and the appellant raised no objection to the relevance 
of that evidence. The Election Tribunal dismissed the petition 
but on appeal the High Court held the charge proved and 
declated the election of the appellant void. 
The appellant con-
tended that the election petition ought to have been dismissed 
because particulars of the contract of hiring which was an essen-
tial ingredient of the corrupt practice had not been given. 
Held, (per Sinha ;c. ]., Jafer Imam, K. N. Wanchoo and 
J.C. Shah, JJ), that the corrupt practice under s. 123(5) was the 
conveying of electors to and from the polling station and not the 
contract of hiring. If the election petition gave particulars about 
the use of a vehicle for conveying of electors to; and from the 
polling station, the failure to give particulars of the contract of 
hiring, as distinguished from the fact of hiring, did not render 
the petition defective. 
An election petition was not liable to be 
B. M. Sugar 
Syndicate Ltd. 
v. 
]. R. Kulkarni 
Sarkar]. 
February, 23 
92 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1960] 
rg6o 
dismissed in limine merely because full particulars of a corrupt 
practice alleged were not set out. If an objection was taken and 
Shri Balwan Singh the Tribunal was of the view that full particulars had not been 
v. 
set out the petitioner had to be given an opportunity to amend 
Shri 
or amplify the particulars. It was only in the event of non-
Lakshmi Narain compliance with the order to supply the particulars that the 
char~e which remained vague could be struck ont. 
Resides, in 
the present case no material prejudice was caused to the appellant 
by the absence of the particulars of the contract of hiring. 
Sarkar J.-Under s. r23(5) the hiring of the vehicle for 
conveyance of electors was an essential element of the corrupt 
practice and it was necessary to give particulars of the contract 
of hiring. 
But the failure to give such particulars did not render 
the petition liable to be dismissed. Section 83 of the Act did not 
provide for the dismissal of the petition for failure to furnish 
particulars nor did s. 90(3) empower the Tribunal to dismiss a 
petition for non-compliance with the provisions of s. 83. The 
appellant was entitled to apply for particulars but he did not do 
so; he could not at a later stage complain about the absence_ of 
the particulars. 
CrvIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal 
No. 4ll of 1959. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and 
order dated 9th January 1959 of the Allahabad High 
Court in :First Appeal No. 448/A of 1958. 
L. K. Jha, P. Rama Reddy, R. K. Garg and R. Pat-
naik fm the appellant. 
G. S. Pathak, G. N. Dikshit, Udai Pratap Singh, 
J. P. Goval, M. S. Gupta and P. C. Aggarwala, fo:r 
respondent No. 1. 
1960. February, 23. The Judgment of Sinha, C. J. 
Imam, Wanchoo and Shah, JJ. was delivered by 
Shah, J. Sarkar, J. delivered a separate Judgment. 
Shah J. 
SHAH, J.-Three candidates, Balwan Singh (herein-
after referred to as the appellant), Ram Dulari and 
Gaya Prasad, contested the election to the U. P. 
Legislative Assembly from t

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