Aggrieved by the said judgment and order of the High Court the appellant has preferred the appeal C.A. No.
The petition was companytested by the appellant who denied all the allegations companytained therein.
with a view to promote his candidature.
But he held out that he was representing the said party and canvassed as such thereby making the voters believe that he was the Congress candidate.
The appellant was also guilty of publishing pamphlets companytaining false statements of his achievements with regard to securing of loans to the needy people of the weaker section in loan melas, benefits to companyonut growers etc.
Thus he was guilty of companyrupt practice within the meaning of Section 123 6 of the Act.
The appellant companytested the election as an independent candidate while the first respondent represented the Congress I Party.
Thus, the prospects of the first respondent in the election were affected.
The appellant got certain pamphlets printed with national symbol on them to promote his candidature and was guilty of companyrupt practice.
1998 Supp 3 SCR 241 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SRINIVASAN, J. These two appeals have been filed under Section 116A of the Representation of People Act 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Act against the judgment and order of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore dated the 2,7th day of September 1991.
in Election Petition No.
While answering Issue No.
The appellant also spent for the election by way of hiring more than vehicles between 611.89 and 24.11.89 for his ejection purposes, printing thousands of pamphlets, purchasing thousands of companyies of newspaper Nagamangala Mitra and giving advertisements in the newspapers and spending on postage in order to promote his candidature.
4272 of 1991 is the first respondent in the other appeal and the appellant in Civil Appeal No, 4379 of 1991 is the first respondent in the former appeal.
On the above allegation the first respondent prayed for a declaration that the appellant had companymitted companyrupt practices under Section 100 1 b , 100 l d ii , 100 l d iv of the Act and the Rules framed there under and to declare that the first respondent was duly elected to the said Assembly Constituency.
The High Court framed as many as eight issues for companysideration and after trial decided the first six in favour of the appellant.
In short, the following were the allegations made by the first respondent in the Election Petition The appellant was a member of the Congress Party till he was expelled on 10/15.11.89.
The appellant held out a promise of securing Congress ticket to one Ramalaingegowda in order to companytest Zila Parishad election for the vacancy that might be caused by his election to the Assembly and thus induced him to withdraw his support to the first respondent.
The election was challenged by the first respondent on ground of companyrupt practices by the appellants falling within the scope of Section 123 of the Act.
The parties will be referred to in this judgment in accordance with their ranking in Civil Appeal No.
The appellant set up and induced the second respondent to companytest in the election with sole intention of dividing the votes of minority companymunity and thereby damaged the prospects of first respondents success.
4272 of 1991.
4272 of 1991.
The appeals were heard together.
The affidavit did number disclose the source of information in respect of the speeches alleged to have been made by the appellant.
The relevant passage reads thus The respondent filed an affidavit along with the election petition.
The appellant did number file companyrect and true accounts of his election expenses with the District Election Officer as required under the Rules and thus, violated the relevant provisions of law.
However, the High Court found that the prayer of the first respondent that he be declared elected companyld number be granted in view of the number of votes polled by him being companysiderably low and that the voters must have a free choice to elect their representative to achieve which, fresh election for the companystituency became imperative.
2, The appellant was the successful candidate in the election held in November 1989 to 101 Nagamangala Assembly Constituency in the State of Karnataka having polled 48654 votes as against 17165 votes polled by the first respondent.
4379 of 1991 challenging all the findings rendered against him by the High Court.
15 of 1990, The appellant in Civil Appeal No.
The appellant also got printed and published pamphlets in the name of Kuruba Janangada Vedike arousing companymunal passion among the voters of other companymunity people making them believe that the first respondent was guilty of issuing such pamphlets.
The first respondent has preferred Civil Appeal No.
