Lectures for respondent No.
2, 3 and 4 were the other three candidates who, having been validly numberinated went to the polls but were defeated.
The respondent No.
These nine issues sub stantiaily companyer the following questions 1 Whether the election petition was presented by a properly authorised person.
1 is the proprietor of the monthly Journal Prawaha and a by weekly paper Matru bhumi.
The said firm has entered into a companytract for the performance of cloth distribution on behalf of the State Government to retailers and holds a licence for the same.
They sent the said petition with Shri P. Gole, Senior Advocate, Akola, with a written authority to present the petition through any person of his choice at Nagpur on the 18th April.
1 is a partner in the firm Berar General Agency.
I on payment of illegal gratification.
I a meeting of workers in Berar Oil Industries a companycern of Birla, was called by its manager on the eve of the election and they were threatened to vote for respondent No.
Obviously each of the bundle of these ballot papers were put in the ballot box by one person, as the ballot papers put in the ballot box by different voters companyld number automatically fold themselves into a companypact bundle in the ballot box.
Under these circumstances Shri Gole booked a seat in the Night Plane for Delhi and flew to Delhi on the 18th and reached there on the morning on 19th April, 1952.
3 Whether the petition was defective for number joinder of certain parties as respondents.
That the respondent No.
1, companyrcing the voters by threats, etc.,
The respondent No.
1,000 for being deposited in the Government Treasury at Nagpur as required by section 117 of the Act and to obtain Treasury receipt for security of companyts to be filed with the petition.
The questions may be taken up one after the other.
1 in public meetings, including respondent No.
Another false propaganda was that Dr. Joglekar was Mishras man, supported by Mishras money.
1,000 security for companyts to be made in the Government Treasury at Nagpur through Mr. Sidhaye, Advocate, Nagpur, and obtained the necessary Government Treasury receipt on the 18th April, 1952.
They also sent with Shri Gole Rs.
On enquiries Shri Gole learnt that there was numbere at Nagpur, who was authorised to receive election petition under the Act.
They felt therefore that their petition was duly presented within 14 days as prescribed by Rule 119.
Substitutes for these workers were engaged by the mills and they were also paid.
The bias was sought to be made out by showing that shortly before the election, Shri Athalye had written a letter to the 1st respondent offering to assist him in his election campaign.
The appellants filed the election Petition under section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Act XLIII of 1951 hereinafter referred to as the Act for setting aside the election on various allegations.
Issuing pamphlets and handbills without names of printer or publisher.
With reference to these pleadings, the Tribunal was of the opinion that it was advisable to frame certain preliminary issues and to dispose of the same before entering on the trial of the case on its merits.
1 and openly canvassing on companymunal and caste lines and using undue influence.
1 has, therefore, interest in the said companytract for the performance of services undertaken by the State Government Madhya Pradesh.
As a result of the adverse findings on these four points, the petition was dismissed without any trial on the merits.
This was numbered by the Returning Officer.
1 canvassed for votes for himself and paid Rs.
Accordingly, nine pre liminary issues were framed.
The Tribunal found only the first of the above points in favour of the petitioners by a majority.
Three persons by name Shri Sohoni, Shri Kulkarni, and Shri Kothkar were numberinated as candidates at the election.
Distribution of blankets and Saries and money to voters.
However reluctant we might be to interfere in a matter like this after the lapse of three years and four months and with only an year and eight months before the general elections, we feel companystrained to send this matter back for due enquiry.
It therefore appears that there was a delay of one day in the representation of the election petition.
I at his expense and companynivance.
Personal character and companyduct of Dr. Joglekar was also falsely attached, thus prejudicing his prospects of election.
Accordingly Shri Gole left Akola for Nagpur by the 1 Down Nagpur Mail, reaching Nagpur at about 9 30 A.M. on 18th April, 1952.
I appeared and filed his written statement on the 6th October, 1952, and the petitioners filed their reply thereto on the 16th October, 1952.
The petitioners shall be ready with their replies on the date of hearing.
Voters were carried in hired carts at many polling stations, particularly at Kapshi Polling Station.
He company sulted R. S. Rangole, who was attached to the Election Office at Nagpur.
201/ , apparently as donation to the Gurudwara, but really as gift for inducing the Sikh Community in the Akola Constituency in general and the Sikhs assembled in particular to induce them to vote for himself at the ensuing election.
201, apparently as donation to the Gurudwara, but really as gift for inducing the Sikh Community in the Akola companystituency in general and the Sikhs assembled in particular to induce them to vote for himself at the ensuing election.
Respondent No.
This explanation has number been found, even by the Tribunal, to be false.
This was done on 31st December, 1951, at Chandur by persons with the companynivance of respondent No.
1 was number suffering from any of these disqualifications in fact on the date of the submission of the numberination paper.
It is against this dismissal that the appellants have number companye up to this Court on obtaining special leave.
But before doing so and in view of the delay and other circumstances that have already happened, we, in exercise of the powers which the Tribunal in the numbermal companyrse might itself have exercised, direct the striking out of all the items of alleged companyrupt practices set out in Schedule A excepting the one companyered by paragraph I of item 1, i.e., as follows That in the month of December, 1951, respondent No.
Each bundle companysisted three or more than three ballot papers, folded together.
At this meeting respondent No.
But this Court declined to grant leave.
Their numberinations were found to be in order on scrutiny by the Returning Officer.
This delay occurred under the following circumstances The applicants prepared their election petition on the 17th April, 1952.
On the 28th April, 1952, the petitioners filed also an application for companydonation of delay setting out the reasons for the same.
JOINDER OF PARTIES The objection as to joinder of parties arises as follows.
On objection being taken, the Tribunal stayed its hands for a preliminary decision of that question.
Nominations were to be filed on or before 15 11 1951, and scrutiny of numberination was due on 17 11 1951.
The income derived from these companytracts by the respondent No.
1 was disqualified for being chosen as and for being a Member of Madhya Pradesh State Assembly under Chapter III, section 7 d of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Act XLIII of 1951 .
1 and their details are shown in the profit and loss statements filed with income tax return of the respondent No.
The respondent No.
But in respect of the other four points, it held against the petitioners unanimously.
I have freely made these false defamatory and malicious statements against Dr. Joglekar, the rival candidate and thus prejudiced the prospects of Dr. Joglekars election.
1 are numbered in the private accounts of the respondent No.
Having regard to the nature of the alleged disqualifi cation, which is substantially to the effect that the returned candidate had interest in companytracts with the Government at the relevant dates, it was very necessary that the matters should have been cleared up in the enquiry before the Election Tribunal.
This was arranged by persons working for and on behalf of respondent No.
12 and 15.
Donation to Bhaji Bazar Association.
The applicants were under the belief that an officer must have been appointed by the Election Commission under section 81 of the Act to whom election petitions companyld be represented for the State of Madhya Pradesh at Nagpur.
to the State Government of Madhya Pradesh.
The sales and other details of the Matru bhumi companycern are numbered in the private accounts of the respondent No.
stationery, paper and printing materials, etc.,
1 caused groups and sections of castes and companymunities, such as Bohara, Lohars, Marwaries, Muslims, Rajasthanies, Bhangies, to issue appeals stating that resolutions were passed for voting for respondent No.
False personation of several dead voters and voters absent in Pakistan has taken place in Ward No.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
These ballot papers thus companylected were bundled together and put in the ballot box by persons working for and on behalf of respondent No.
Thereupon the petitioners moved this Court for special leave against the order of the High Court.
4 Whether the petition is defective for want of proper verification.
158 of 1954.
He then made enquiries about the officer who may have been appointed to receive the election petitions.
His man announced on loud speakers from place to place that rival candidate Dr. Joglekar was of the caste and party of Godse, the murderer of M. Gandhi and a vote for him was a vote for Gandhis Murderer.
2 Whether there was sufficient cause for presentation of the petition one day out of time.
The respondent No.
1 gets a share by way of companymission on sales effected by the Limited Company.
Mohota Mills released workers and paid them for canvassing work for respondent No.
1 limitation, 2 joinder of parties, 3 verification, and 4 specification of particulars of companyrupt practices in Schedule A attached to the petition, is companyrect, and if so, whether the same entailed dismissal of the petition.
LIMITATIONAs stated above, the petition was filed on the 19th April, 1952, admittedly one day beyond time.
5 Whether the petition was defective for vagueness of the particulars relating to the companyrupt practices set out in Schedule A thereto.
At this meeting respondent No.
Similar instances of giving illegal gratifications for securing votes of respective groups are Donation to Hkariharpeth Akhada Payment to Panch bungalow Committee of Bhangis of Old City.
At the time of companynting votes in Polling Station No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAGANNADHADAS J. This is an appeal by special leave against the Judgment and order of the Election Tribunal, Akola, Madhya Pradesh, dated the 1st May, 1953, dismissing the election petition filed by the appellants.
At the instance of respondent No.
1 resorted to false propaganda.
This reply was filed on the 16th October, 1952, which is the very date on which the first of the above orders extracted from the order sheet was passed.
In paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 thereof the circumstances under which the delay is said to have occurred were set out as follows The applicants were under the belief that Notice under Rule 113 of the Rules framed under the above Act was published on 5th April, 1952, in the official Gazette of the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Mr. Gole caused the deposit of Rs.
At this time of scrutiny objection was taken to the numberination paper of respondent No.
Respondents, Nos.
The first respondent was the successful candidate at the election.
In due companyrse respondent No.
to vote for respondent No.
The ballot papers issued to voters were number put in the box by the voters themselves, but were illegally brought back by the voters and handed over to persons working for and on behalf of respondent No.
Suratsingb.
53, several folded bundles amounting to about 20 in number, of ballot papers were found in the ballot box of respondent No.
These objections were summarily overruled by the Returning Officer, without any inquiry or any reason These allegations, if made out with such further details as may be necessary, might well prove serious and bring about the setting aside of the election of the returned candidate.
The poster of the rival candidate affixed on the post office within the premises of the Berar Oil Industries was removed and stolen away.
under taken by the State Government of Madhya Pradesh.
Respondent No.
1 was guilty of bribery within the meaning of that term in section 123 of the Representation of the People Act.
I for the relevant year and current year.
The respondent No.
He has, therefore, by himself interest in the companytracts of the companypany with the State Government of Madhya Pradesh.
He has also interest in companytracts for the execution of works or performance of services, such as printing, etc.,
These publications print Government advertisements on companytract basis.
1 on polling day.
The 1st respondent in answer to these allegations states as follows It is denied that there was any improper acceptance of the numberination paper of respondent No.
It is number in the interest of purity of elections that such allegations of disqualification should be companypletely ignored without enquiry and it appears rather surprising that the Tribunal should have ignored them and exercised its power to dismiss the petition.
I had been to the premises of Akola Shree Gurdwara, where the Local Sikh Community had assembled to listen to the recitation of the holy book Granth Saheb on the 7th day of the death of daughter of one Sardar Suratsingh.
1 canvassed for votes for himself and paid Rs.
The Election Commission admitted the petition after companydoning the delay under the proviso to section 85 of the Act and thereupon companystituted a Tribunal for the trial of the petition at Akola by numberifications dated the 30th July, 1952, and 22nd September 1952.
On 19th April Shri Gole caused the petition to be presented to the Secretary to the Election Commission.
1, when it was opened for companynting votes.
1, therefore, has interest by himself in the said companytract for the performance of services undertaken by the Government.
The petition was filed on the 19th April, 1952, before the Election Commission at Delhi and was admittedly one day beyond the prescribed time.
The two appellants are the electors of the said companystituency.
Veda Vyas, S. K. Kapur and Ganpat Rai, with him , for the appellants.
1 on several grounds but the material grounds were that respondent No.
The petitioners, while they impleaded as respondents the three unsuccessful candidates who went to the polls, did number implead these three persons.
1 is disqualified to fill the seat under the Act.,
Applicants, however, learn that actually the Notice under Rule 113 was published in the Official Gazette of 4th April, 1952.
The objections are as follows The material facts in support of the grounds are as follows The election of candidate for the Madhya Pradesh State Assembly in the single member Akola Constituency was announced to be held on 31 12 1951.
May 2.
He has, as a share holder and director, interest, in companytracts for supply of goods, viz.
1 by taking illegal gratifications.
N. Phadke and Naunit Lal, with him , for respondent No.
It relates to the election for the Akola Constituency of the State Assembly of Madhya Pradesh which was held on the 13th December, 1951, and the result of which was numberified in the Gazette on the 4th April, 1952.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India .ill.
The explanation thus furnished was accepted by the Election Commission as appears from the intimation to the petitioners by letter dated the 30th July, 1952.
The view taken by the Tribunal was that these were also necessary parties and that their number joinder rendered the petition liable for 1 1955 1 S.C.R. 140.
1 on pain of losing their service or suffer pecuniary loss, in case they did number vote for respondent No.
because he is the Managing Agent or Managing Director of Rajasthan Printing and Litho Works private limited companypany under the Indian Companies Act.
