O.P.P. Whether the companytents of Annexure PA pertain to the personal character and companyduct of the petitioner and were even false to the knowledge of the respondent and he did number believe the same to be true?
The Election Petition thereafter refers to the various meetings held in the companystituency wherein the said posters were read out and distributed by the respondent his election agent as well as B.J.P. workers with the companysent of the respondent.
They came out with a poster like Anne w re PA allegedly purported to have been published by Shri Parma Nand brother of Shri Kanshi Ram numbere the less as would be clear from the paragraphs hereinafter companytained that it was the respondent who was instrument in preparing the draft as well as getting the posters printed in the name of Shri Parma Nand.
These statements of facts companytained in Annexure PA are number only published and circulated through out the companystituency by the companysent of the respondent but as a matter of fact these posters have been got printed and circulated by the respondent himself surreptitiously in the name of Shri Parma Nand.
m e remaining issue Nos.
O.P.P. Whether the respondent through the companytents of Annexure PA actually promoted feelings of enmity and hatred between the voters of the companyatituency on the grounds of caste and companymunity with a view to prejudicially affect the election of the petitioner?
It will be relevant to extract the relevant paragraphs of the Election Petition to bring out the points involved in the case That Shri Virendar Advocate of Kangra Kali Dass Pradhan Massal Panchayat Shri Ram Chand Bhatia respondent Kanshi Ram Janata Party F candidate and Shri Kidar Nath Bassi who was election incharge in the Constituency for B.J.P. joined hands amongst themselves and started a vilification campaign against the character and companyduct of the petitioner.
m e bare perusal of Annexure PA would show that the companytents are in relation to the personal character and companyduct of the petitioner.
However whispering campaign assessinating character and companyduct of the petitioner had started by the respondent in companylusion and companynivance with Shri Kanshi Ram Janata candidate.
me companytents of this poster malign the companyduct of the petitioner as an L.A. and Minister in addition to his personal character.
He also denied the printing or the publication or distribution of the poster in the companystituency by him or his agent or any other person with his companysent.
If so what is its effect?
He further found that the appellant had distributed the offending poster.
That the companytents of the poster at Annexure PA companytain appeal to the voters to refrain from voting in favour of the petitioner on the ground of caste and companymunity which has prejudicially affected the election of the petitioner.
O.P.P. Whether the respondent his agent or any other person with his companysent appealed to the voters to vote in his favour and to refrain from voting in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the caste and companymunity as companytained in the Election Petition?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,When I asked Shri Kanshi Ram as to why he did number mention his own name in the poster, he told me that Shri Parma Nand is his elder brother and the poster is to be issued in his name I asked for making some payment in advance for printing the posters.
I had issued a receipt In token of the receipt of the amount to Shri Kanshi Ram in the name of Shri Parma Nand.
Shri Kanshi Ram the Janata Candidate is the Pardhan of Gram Panchsyat Pathiar and the respondent immediately before his election was also Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Amtrar and both of them have close relations with each other since long time back.
From the judgment and Order dated 11.10.1984 of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in E.P. No.
The appellant also denied calling of some of the meetings in the companystituency on various dates.
After hearing the arguments on the preliminary issue the same was decided against the appellant holding that Shri Kanshi Ram was number a necessary party to the Election Petition.
The appellant feeling aggrieved by the impugned order of the learned Single Judge has approached this Court by Special leave.
The Election Petition was companytested on grounds inter alia that appellant was in numberway party to bring out the poster Annexure PA which clearly shows that it was issued by one Parma Nand Pathiar the brother of Shri Kanshi Ram after having got it printed at Modern Press at Nagrota that poster like Annexure PA appeared in the companystituency during the last week of March when there was only a possibility that election might be held in June 1982 that respondent had numberconnection with Shri Kanshi Ram who in fact opposed the appellant in the election and was himself a candidate on behalf of the Janata Party that Annexure PA in numberway tranished the personal character of the election petitioner and that it only related to the political companyduct of the petitioner respondent as an M.L.A. and Minister during the period of 15 years from 1967 onwards when he was elected as an M.L.A. for the first time that there was numberappeal in the poster Annexure PA that the voters should refrain from voting in favour of the respondent on the ground of caste and companymunity and that in fact all the companytesting candidates except Shri Vidhi Chand belong to the same caste and companymunity that the companytents of Annexure PA cannot be said to promote the feelings of enmity and hatred between the voters of the companystituency on the ground of caste and companymunity.
P. Bansal K.C. Dua and N.N. Aggarwal for the Appel lant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
After scrutiny there remained only 4 companytestants in the field.
O.P.R. Whether the companytents of Annexure PA fall within the definition of companyrupt practices as defined under section 123 3 3A and 4 of the Representation of the People Act?
The appellant Shri Ram Chand Bhatia was sponsored by Bhartiya Janata Party Shri Hardyal the respondent was the official numberinee of Congress I Party Shri Kanshi Ram was a Janata Party candidate and Shri Vidhi Chand was the official numberinee of the Communist Party of India.
4392 NCE of 1984.
1 was treated as preliminary issue at the request of the companynsel for the parties.
That the companytents of the poster and facts stated therein are false to the knowledge of the respondent and the respondent does number believe these facts to be true.
On these findings he allowed the Election Petition and declared the election of the appellant as void.
The appellant was declared elected to the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly by a margin of 3364 votes.
If so what is its effect?
mat the respondent through the companytents of Annexure PA has actually promoted feelings of enmity and hatred between the voters of the companystituency on the grounds of caste and companymunity with a view to prejudicially affect the election of the petitioner.
S. Krishnamurthy Iyer V.C. Mahajan K.R. Nagaraja and S. Hegde for the Respondent.
Whether the respondent his agent or any other person with his companysent published or distributed himself through his agent or any other person with his companysent annexure PA as alleged in the Election Petition?
Pursuant to a Notification dated 17th of April 1982 under sub section 2 of section 15 of the Act calling upon all the assembly companystituencies in the State to elect members of the Legislative Assembly in accordance with the Act and the rules framed therein a number of persons filed their numberination papers from 46 Nagrota Constituency.
As regards the printing of the offending poster the learned Judge found that even if it was number proved that the poster in question was printed at the instance of the appellant or his election agent the offence of companyrupt practice is established if it is proved that the appellant himself had distributed the offended poster.
Shri Kanshi Ram Janata Party candidate secured 1049 votes while Shri Vidhi Chand secured 1889 votes.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA, J. The present appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Simla dated 11th October 1984 declaring the election of the appellant as void under section 100 1 b of the Representation of People Act 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
me poster annexed to the petition as Annexure PA later on exhibited as Pl in the companyrse of the trial of the case is the bone of companytention in the election petition.
O.P.P. Issue No.
mat these posters came out for the first time in the Constituency during the last week of March 1982.
7 of 1982.
Shri Hardyal the respondent was the next rival candidate.
The respondent filed an election petition challenging the election of the appellant under section 81 of the Act on the ground that Shri Kanshi Ram Janata Party candidate companyspired with the appellant and other persons to get printed posters like the one annexed to the said petition as Annexure PA companytaining false statement of facts assailing the personal character of the election petitioner Shri Hardyal and distributed the same during the election period with the object of prejudicially affecting the prospects of election of Shri Hardyal.
if so what is its effect?
2 3 5 and 6 being interconnected were disposed of together.
Shri Kanshi Ram paid me a sum of Rs, 125 as advance I delivered 3000 posters to Shri Kanshi Ram who was accompanied by some persons and he paid me the balance amount of Rs.
In cross examination he admitted that There were two or three persons accompanying Shri Kanshi Ram but the respondent was number seen by me.
The allegations of the parties gave rise to the following six issues Whether Shri Kanshi Ram who was a candidate in the election is a necessary party to the petition in view of the allegations made in paras 3 4 and 19 of the Election Petition?
O.P. Parties.
If so what is its effect?
The respondent tn the Election Petition was the present appellant.
The learned Judge held that the companytents of Annexure PA pertain to the personal character and companyduct of the petitioner.
On 3rd March, 1982 the manuscript of the posters like Ex,P.l was given to me for printing by Shri Kanshi Ram Chauthary, Pradhan of Pathiar Panchayat, ,,,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,.,,,,.
225 on that day.
