the high companyrt also held that sidhanti bad appealed for votes on the ground of his language and had asked the electorate to refrain from voting for daulta on the ground of the language of the latter and such appeals constituted a companyrupt practice.
and an appeal to the electorate to secure a reversal of the policies and programme of the government was number.
sidhanti said generally that the evidence given by the wit nesses for daulta regarding what transpired at maira dubal dhan and three other meetings was number true.
the territory of the state of punjab is divided into two regions the hindi speaking region and the tunjabi speaking region.
the tribunal held inter alia that the om flag was number a religious symbol of the arya samaj that numbersatisfactory proof was adduced that om flag had been used as a 134 159 s.c.
the article published on january 4 1962 can have numberbearing on the use of the flag at rohtak in the meeting dated february 4 1962.
purshotham trikamdas rajinder nath mittal r. b. datar v. kumar.
the government of punjab decided to replace urdu and english by hindi in the hindi speaking region and punjabi in the punjabi speaking region and for that purpose a scheme called the sachar formula was devised the salient feature of which was that every student reading in the punjab schools by the time he passed his matriculation examination should be proficient both in hindi and punjabi.
his version is also different from the version as given in sch.
other meeting companyvened by the other parties and that he companyld number speak about the names of the speakers who took part in the meeting companyvened by the hariana lok samiti.
clvil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 936 of 1963 appeal from the judgment and order dated may 31 1963 of the punjab high companyrt in first appeal from order number 2/3 of 1963.
k. katyal said that he had attended the meeting at rohtak town as a special companyrespondent of the hindustan times delhi and that he recollected that flags with a symbol of om inscribed thereon were seen flying on some vehicles but it was number possible for him to say who owned those vehicles but from the flags and placards carried on the vehicles it appeared that they were of the hariana lok samiti.
the criticism by sidhanti in his appeal to the electorate related to the political leanings of daulta and his support to the policy of the government and wag number personally directed against him.the agitation against the language policy of the government gained strength and there was a great mass movement in 1957 in the entire state of punjab.
the function of the companymittees was to advise the local government in matters of finance and other related matters.
the hindi speaking region is very largely populated by hindus while in the punjabi speaking region the population is approximately equally divided between the hindus and sikhs.
the witnesses who supported the case of the appellant were piare lal prof.
allegations about undue influence on the voters in the exercise of their free electoral right were also made in the petition and details of these alleged companyrupt practices were furnished in the schedule annexed to the petition.
witness dafedar singh who is a police companystable said that he had been deputed to report about the proceedings of the meeting.
the witnesses for daulta were roop ram.
and for that purpose they held meetings in the hariana region of the punjab and appealed to the electorate to vote for sidhanti on the ground of his religion and language.
on these and findings recorded on other issues number material in this appeal the petition filed by daulta was dismissed by the election tribunal.
the witnesses in support of the case of daulta are ram nath sapra dafedar singh k. k. katyal and satyavrat bedi.
48 symbol of arya samaj or that an appeal to secure votes with the aid of the flag was made to the electorate by sidhanti or by any one else with his companysent that there was no satisfactory evidence to establish that appeals were made to the electorate to vote for sidhanti or to refrain from voting for the other candidates on the ground of religion or language and that the applicant daulta failed to prove that an appeal on the ground of caste companymunity or religion or language had been made to the electorate to further the prospects of sidhanti or to prejudicially affect the election of the other candidates.
the high companyrt further held that the appellant had delivered speeches at majra dubaldhan in the pandal on which the om flag was flying that as even an isolated act of the use of or appeal to the om flag may companystitute a companyrupt practice under s. 123 3 that companyrupt practice by sidhanti and his agents and by his supporters with his companysent was established.
d annexed to the petition under the heading summary of the meetings and observed that the summary was at companyplete variance with the testimony of the witness.
in the punjab before the partition urdu and english were the two official languages.
on this part of the case however the high companyrt disagreed with the tribunal.
d by the petitioner daulta himself.
sher singh and jug lal.
there was great resentment against the formation of the regional companymittees and the implementation of the sachar formula which resulted in the launching of a movement called the hindi agitation.
in the view of the tribunal the testimony of this witness was vague and numberreliance companyld be placed thereon.
after the partition a controversy about the official language arose.
sher singh mahashe bharat singh and achilles bhagwan dev who were leaders and active workers of the gurukul section of the arya samaj had organised a political movement called the hindi agitation in 1957 the real object of which was to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between the sikh and the hindu companymunities in the state of punjab on the ground of religion and language to promote their prospects in the general elections to be held in 1962.
sidhanti admitted that he had participated in the meetings to canvass votes but claimed that he was number responsible for convening the meetings or for the speeches made by others in those meetings that the om flag was number a religious symbol and denied that it was used on any occasion by him or his agents or the six persons named by daulta in his petition except bhagwan dev who was accustomed throughout his career to carry a pennant with om and his own name inscribed thereon on his motor vehicle but carrying of such a flag or pennant on bhagwan devs vehicle during the election was number with his sidhantis companysent and that it did number amount to companymission of a companyrupt practice as defined in the act that the residents of hariana area were mainly hindi speaking but the government of punjab had made punjabi language in gurmukhi script a companypulsory subject at various levels of school education and this gave rise to a wide spread agitation against the policy of the government that to resist the implementation of the policy and the programme of the government in the administrative econumberic and developmental spheres and to mitigate the hardships of the residents of the hariana region and to secure redress of their grievances the hariana lok samiti was formed.
and used a religious symbol a flag called om dhwaj in all these meetings that the appellant himself made similar appeals to the electorate and appealed to them to refrain from voting for daulta who was a sitting member of the house of the people from the companystituency stating that he daulta was an enemy of the arya samaj and of the hindi language that during the election campaign fifteen meetings were held between december 10 1961 and february 18 1962 and at all these meetings appeals were made to the electorate on the ground of religion and language of sidhanti and attempts were made to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between sikhsand hindus of the punjab.
the high court did number place any reliance upon the testimony of this witness.
sher singh who was an impor tant political leader in the hariana region.
he deposed that he had never attended any procession or meeting organised by the hariana lok samiti but he had seen the motorvehicles employed by the hanana lok sanmti carrying om flags which were used by the candidates of the hariana lok samiti.
it was submitted an appeal on the ground of language or religion and did number amount to a companyrupt practice within the meaning of s. 123 of the representation of the people act 1951.
daulta prefered an appeal against that order to the high court of judicature for punjab.
budh dev prof.
he also submitted that the hariana lok samiti had numberconnection with the arya samaj it being a political organization started by prof.
therefore the only meeting which took place within the companystituency where sidney and daulta companytested the election in which according to the high companyrt the om flag was used was at majra dubaldhan held on january 19 1962.
daulta stated that the appellant sidhanti was set up as a candidate to companytest the election by the harding lok samiti that the appellant and six other persons piare lal bhajnik ch.
in order to appreciate the plea raised by companynsel for the parties and their beating on the evidence it may be useful to refer to the political background in the hariana region and the companystituency in particular in which companyrupt practices are alleged to have been companymitted.
rohtak town was number but rohtak suburban area was within the companystituency in which daulta and sidhanti were companytesting the election.
many persons were imprisoned or detained in the cause of the agitation for individual acts done by them.
om flags were exhibited.
badlu ram pt.
he also stated that he had seen some shopkeepers in sampla and bahadurgarh flying om flags on their stalls.
two principal questions which survive for determination in this appeal are whether a religious symbol was used in the companyrse of election by the appellant his agents or other persons with his companysent in furtherance of the prospects of his election and whether appeals were made to the electorate by sidhanti his agents or other persons with his companysent to vote in his favour on account of his language and to refrain from voting in favour of daulta on the ground of his language.
but the movement was number and companyld number be declared illegal.
while generally agreeing with this view the high court observed that the testimony of the witness katyal that the om flag was flying at the office of the hariana lok samiti at rohtak which was the headquarters office and in the procession which was led by bharat singh a number of om flags were seen may be accepted.
the tribunal was of the view that the testimony of the witness was unreliable because he did number remember the details of any.
sidhanti denied that the six persons who were named as his agents and supporters ever acted as his agents in his elec tion campaign and submitted that they were merely interested in the success of the candidates set up by the hariana lok samiti and acted throughout on their own and number as his agents.
s. pathak bawa shiv charan singh hardev singh rajendra dhawan anand prakash and y. kumar for respondent number 1.
in the last week of december 1957 there was a settlement between the organisers of the movement and the state government and the movement was called off.
six witnesses directly spoke about the details of that meeting beside sidhanti.
in companying to the conclusion that the evidence of the witness was unreliable the tribunal referred to the details given in sch.
he admitted in cross examination that he did number visit any office of the hariana lok samiti either at bahadurgarh or at sampla as all his attention was companyfined to the central office of the hariana lok samiti at rohtak.
sukhi ram and ramdhari balmiki.
against the order this appeal is preferred with certificate granted by the high companyrt.
on february 27 1962 the appellant jagdev singh sidhanti was declared elected.
under the scheme two regional companymittees were formed one knumbern as the hindi regional companymittee and the other the punjabi regional companymittee.
the testimony of the witness therefore was far from companyvincing and the testimony of sidhanti piare lal bharat singh budh dev prof.
sher singh and bhagwan dev was more reliable.
on that part of the case the evidence of satyavrat bedi is number of much use.
he stated that he companytributed a number of articles to hariana tilak rohtak founded by him in which he had published on january 4 1962.
satyavrat bedi who is staff companyrespondent of the indian express stated that during his survey of the election campaign he visited sampla bahadurgarh and rohtak in one day and made his report about his observations to the newspaper indian express in which he had recorded that religious symbols and religion were being frequently used for damaging the chances of success of daulta that he had seen a large number of flags fluttering on many house tops.
pratap singh daulta who was one of the candidates at the election then filed a petition with the election commission praying inter alia that the election of the appellant be declared void on the ground that the appellant sidhanti his agents and other persons with his consent.
sri ram sharma was a candidate for election on behalf of a political party called the hariana front.
the high companyrt did number refer to the infirmities disclosed in the testimony of the witness particularly the discrepancies between the statement of daulta in his petition and the testimony given by this witness.
he also deposed that he had gone to the office of the hariana lok samiti at rohtak and saw a similar flag flying on the building of the office.
the principal witnesses who were examined by sidhanti in respect of this meeting were piare lal bharat singh budh dev prof.
the high companyrt has number referred to the testimony of this witness in support of its companyclusion and numberhing more need be said about him.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. at the general elections held in february 1962 five candidates companytested the election to the house of the people from the jhajjar parliamentary companystituency.
d annexed to the petition.
b. p. singh and naunit lal for the appellant.
february 12 1964.
an article companydemning the use of the om flag for the purpose of elections.
had companymitted certain companyrupt practices in connection with the election.
