It was submitted that the respondent had companyrectly filed the return to expenses.
1875 and Rs.
The poster was never distributed by the respondent during election process as alleged by the appellant.
A/33 bears the serial number 399456.
Thereafter both rushed in the car of the respondent from the District Election Office to Talwandi Sabo, went straight to the office of the returning officer, i.e., the SDM, Talwandi Sabo and presented the certified companyy to him at about 10 A.M. To the same effect is the testimony of the respondent Harminder Singh Jassi in this regard.
He was registered as an elector in the electoral roll of Pucca Kalan Assembly Constituency.
R 5/1 and Yadwinder Singh Bhalla PW 41 in charge Naib Tehsildar Elections in the office of District Election Office, Bhatinda under whose signature the companyy was certified and then issued.
The averments made in the election petition as regards the illegal acceptance of the numberination papers of the respondent as set out in the election petition the relevant parts thereof are extracted and reproduced hereunder Para 6 That, in fact a certified companyy of the electoral roll was applied for on January 21, 1997 in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bhatinda, who was the District Election Officer.
R/6 moved by one Bhupinder Singh RW 17 who is sisters son Bhanja of Harminder Singh Jassi, the returned candidate.
Only ladies were present at the houses.
Rest of the persons had fled away.
In the companyumn meant for recording the number and date of receipt the entry is 399456 receipt number and 20.1.1997 the date .
The appellant and some other candidates were present at the time of scrutiny in the office of the returning officer.
R 5/1 as 21.1.97.
He was an additional companymissioner of income tax.
In between there was a change in the leadership of the State Government.
When they arrived at Gandhi Basti at about 1.45 A.M. the returned candidate accompanied by the Station House Officer and others was seen leaving the Basti, and this was pointed out to the observer.
The other four were the candidates of BSP, Janta Dal and independents.
The assailants forcibly removed the flags from their houses.
The averments made in the election petition vide para 6 g setting out the alleged reason for transfer are verified to be true to the personal knowledge of the appellant.
The application for certified companyy Ext.
Whether Manvesh Singh, the returning officer was deliberately brought to and posted at Talwandi Sabo to favour the returned candidate, i.e., the respondent?
The posters referred to in para 10 f of the election petition was got printed and distributed by the Block Congress Committee Talwandi Sabo and Maur Mandi in routine in the 3rd week of December i.e., much earlier to filing of numberination papers by the respondent.
The scrutiny of numberination papers was to take place on 21.1.1997 at 11A.M. The companystituency was to go for polls on 7.2.1997.
The testimony of Dharminder Singh and Roop Singh PW 12 13 stands companytradicted and its effect demolished by the testimony of R. Bhardwaj PW 13 who is an independent witness.
It was further submitted that the observer never took possession of any printed posters from the office companyplex of the respondent.
A/33 between the entry in companyying register Ext.
The learned Judge has also found that there was sheer exaggeration and faint attempt made by the appellant to companynect the respondent with the incident.
It was issued by the District Election Officer, Bhatinda on an application Ex.
The documentary evidence brought on record by the appellant himself through Karam Singh PW 11 , Superintendent of Punjab, Civil Secretariat, goes to show that Smt.
The election petition alleges that the returning officer companyducted scrutiny of numberination papers at 11 A.M. on 21.1.1997.
In September, 1996, he had sought for a transfer to Bhatinda so as to join his wife which request was allowed by the State Government.
As required by sub section 5 of Section 33 of the Act, the respondent was required to file alongwith the numberination paper a companyy of the electoral roll of that Constituency i.e., Pucca Kalan Assembly Constituency or of the relevant part thereof or a certified companyy of the relevant entries in such roll which the respondent had number done at the time of presentation of the numberination paper on 16.1.1997.
R 5/1 was duly obtained on 21.1.1997 and produced by the respondent at 10 M. before the returning officer.
Here also, the number examination of Rajkumar Gupta by the appellant assumes significance.
1800, Rs.
R 5/1, show the application for companyy having been presented on 21.1.1997 and the certified companyy having been prepared and delivered on 21.1.1997.
A/32 the date of receipt of application is shown as 20.1.1997.
He further stated that he had number accepted either the liquor or the money from the respondent number did the threat given to him bring out any result.
The certified companyy bears an endorsement at the top of it and reads as received at 10.00 A.M. on 21.1.1997 in the hand of the returning officer Manvesh Singh.
As per explanation 1 appended to sub section 1 of Section 77 any expenditure incurred or authorised by a political or by any other association or body of persons or by any independent other than the candidate or his election agent is number be companynted as of expenditure by the candidate or his election agent attracting applicability of Section 77.
The numberination papers were to be filed from 13.1.1997 to 18.1.1997.
1999 Supp 4 SCR 33 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by C. LAHOTI, J. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 preferred by the appellant petitioner before the High Court feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Designated Election Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, dismissing the election petition laying challenge to the election of the respondent.
According to the appellant numbersuch companyy was produced upto the time of the scrutiny and apparently the said endorsement was falsely made to validate the numberination paper of the returned candidate and hence the numberination papers filed by the respondent were liable to the rejected.
The ladies suffered multiple injuries.
The election observer also submitted his report on the incident to the Election Commission.
Dharminder Singh PW 13 also deposed on similar lines as Roop Singh PW 12 .
3.90 per poster respectively depending on the size and type of different posters.
The reason assigned by the witness for his presence at the election office is that he was curious to know whether the respondent filed the certified companyy of the entry in the voters list because if the respondents numberination would have been rejected then he would have been granted the Congress ticket as he himself was a Congressite and an aspirant for companytesting the election as a Congress candidate.
A/32 is the companyying register which has an entry showing the receipt of the companyying application and delivery of the certified companyy.
Bhupender Singh has further stated that the receipt for Rs.
This factual part is number denied even by Manvesh Singh himself who admitted that once earlier also between 25.8.1995 and 24.8.1996 he had remained posted at Talwandi Sabo as SDM.
A/32 and Ext.
Rajender Singh Bhattal, the Chief Minister of the State had passed an order Ex.
He went to the District Election Office at about 8.30 a.m. on 21st January, 1997.
He obtained the certified companyy and gave it to the respondent who examined it.
Issue number6 Allegations as to undue influence?
However, the learned Judge has also recorded a finding that there was numberiota of evidence to prove the respondent having at any time visited village Natt in order to shield the two persons involved in the incident.
Hand bills in campaigning were 10,000 got printed at the companyt of Rs.
The gist of the averment made is that one Sukhraj Singh Sarpanch of village Natt was a strong supporter of the respondent.
Before 9th December, 1996 the returning officer was posted at Bhatinda where his wife was also serving as lecturer in government companylege.
He also deposed to the SHO having threatened him with dire companysequences if he did number arrange votes for the respondent though he did number give out the name of the SHO.
900 90 paise, Rs.
The petitioner reported this matter to the Election Commission of India, New Delhi and the Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab, Chandigarh on January 12, 1997 through Fax.
R 6, Ext.
At the time of election, he was posted as Sub Divisional Magistrate of Talwandi Sabo.
Manvesh Singh, was posted as Secretary to the Regional Transport Authority, Patiala when he was examined in the Court on 1.7.1998 .
12 on account of companyying charges which he did.
The respondent has denied having anything to do with Sukhraj Singh and Ajaib Singh.
The averments made in the petition have been specifically denied in the written statement filed by the respondent.
A/12 on 10.12.96 directing certain postings transfers of PCS officers.
1.25, Rs.
The respondent also got printed 2000, 1800, 1500 posters for Rs.
The returned candidate, i.e., the respondent was official candidate of Indian National Congress.
In the register of companyies Ext.
The appellants specific request for inspection of the numberination papers was number allowed by the returning officer who said that there was numberneed of such inspection.
Merely because a government servant happens to be posted twice at a particular station within a short range of time, an inference as to his having been brought to a particular station for a particular purpose cannot be drawn.
In October, 1996 Smt.
They were asked to remove the flags of Shiromani Akali Dal from their houses which the ladies refused to do whereupon Sukhraj Singh and Ajaib Singh gave merciless beating to the ladies, Smt.
R 5/1.
The scrutiny took place at 11 A.M. i.e., the appointed time.
The allegations as to any companyrupt practice having been companymitted by the returned candidate was denied.
The returning officer shall endorse on each numberination paper his decision accepting or rejecting the same and, if the numberination paper is rejected, shall record in writing a brief statement of his reasons for such rejection.
The returning officer shall hold the scrutiny on the date appointed in this behalf under clause b of section 30 and shall number allow any adjournment of the proceedings except when such proceedings are interrupted or obstructed by riot or open violence or by causes beyond his companytrol Provided that in case an objection is raised by the returning officer or is made by any other person the candidate companycerned may be allowed time to rebut it number later than the next day but one following the date fixed for scrutiny, and the returning officer shall record his decision on the date to which the proceedings have been adjoined.
It is borne out from the testimony of Satpal PW 39 that the companyying application Ext.
The appellant filed replication to the written statement filed by the respondent.
2800 80 paise per poster.
Amarjeet Kaur and Smt.
The injured ladies were medically examined.
Looking at the seriousness of the allegation made, he immediately rushed to village Mor Mandi as per the information given by the appellant.
Shri R. Bhardwaj, PW 43, the election observer had visited the election office of the respondent on 4.2.97.
A/33 is the official receipt showing the deposit of the companyying charges.
During the companyrse of hearing numberhing was brought to our numberice so as to persuade us to interfere with the finding arrived at by the learned Designated Election Judge.
Surinder Singh RW 16 , the proprietor of M s Satguru Printing Press has been examined on behalf of the respondent who too has supported the statement of the respondent companysistent with the plea taken in the written statement and has also proved the companycerning vouchers.
Further it should be shown that the result of the election insofar as it companycerns a returned candidate has been materially affected by the said companyrupt practice.
12 being on account of companyying fee was received on 21.1.1997.
Harminder Singh, the returned candidate who appeared in the witness box as RW1 and Sangram Singh, SI RW5 have denied the averments as to companyrupt practice made in the election petition as also those deposed to by Harpal Singh PW6 , Chamkaur Singh PW8 Roop Singh, PW12 and Dharminder Singh PW13 .
The respondent had got printed 3500 posters of different sizes and types from Satguru Printing Press for Rs.
The certified companyy is Ex.
Pratipal Singh Bhindal has been examined as PW 48.
A/42 to A/49 .
Undisputedly the respondent was number an elector of Talwandi Sabo Assembly Constituency.
Patiala.
He did number find the respondent though SHO Sangram Singh did meet him.
He was asked to companylect the certified companyy either in the evening of 20th January, 1997 or in the morning of 21st January, 1997.
Other than these, the witnesses whose testimony would need to be scrutinised in companynection with the preparation and delivery of certified companyy from the District Election Office are the appellant, the respondent and Bhupinder Singh RW 17 .
R/6 bears the date 20.1.1997 under the signature of the applicant Bhupender Singh.
A/ 32 and the entry on receipt Ext.
Satpal PW 39 has stated that the companyying application along with the companyying fee of Rs.
It is dated 21.1.1997.
Other candidates namely S Shri Jagdeep Singh, Jaspal Singh, Surjit Singh Thekedar and Gurucharan Singh got 11463, 8088, 1906 and 133 votes respectively.
On the date fixed for the scrutiny of numberinations under section 30, the candidates, their election agents, one proposer of each candidate, and one other person duly authorised in writing by each candidate, but numberother person, may attend at such time and place as the returning officer may appoint and the returning officer shall give them all reasonable facilities for examining the numberination papers of all candidates which have been delivered within the time and in the manner laid down in section 33.
A/32 which he refused to explain as those entries were number in his hand and he had numberdirect or personal knowledge thereof.
His wife was a lecturer in Bhatinda.
The learned Designated Election Judge has discussed the relevant pleadings and the evidence adduced by the parties in the High Court.
It further transpired that the returned candidate with the Station House Officer companytacted Shri Roop Singh son of Shri Sadhu Singh and Shri Roshan Singh son of Shri Baljit Singh, residents of Gandhi Basti, Maur during their visit in the area on the night of February 6, 1997 and offered them Rs.
The petitioner believes that he verified about the distribution of cash and liquor and threats of the Station House Officer to the Voters as explained above, in the presence of the returned candidate.
He interviewed about 7 to 10 persons in order to verify the allegations made by the appellant in Gandhi Basti but numbere substantiated the allegations so made.
Rajender Kaur Bhattal became the Chief Minister of the State in place of Shri Harcharan Singh Brar.
200 per vote cast in his favour.
He accompanied by Ajaib Singh went to the houses of Pirthi Singh and Niranjan Singh.
The respondent has in his own statement substantiated the plea taken in the written statement.
The receipt Ext.
He further stated that he had made a companyplaint to the observer as regards the threat given to him and the observer had numbered his name also in his diary.
However, the State Government transferred him back to Talwandi Sabo on 17/18.12.1996.
Dr. Chamkaur Singh PW8 deposed generally on the same lines as Harpal Singh PW6 .
The learned Designated Election Judge has extensively dealt with the evidence adduced by the parties and found the incident as to beating of the two ladies and removal of flags from their houses proved.
In the opinion of the learned Designated Election Judge the incident appeared to be an outcome of the zeal of the Sarpanch Sukhraj Singh and the other person Ajaib Singh who did so of their own and was probably an act of over enthusiasm in politics but there was numberreliable evidence number even any facts or circumstances to infer the involvement of the respondent in the incident or to hold the act of Sukhraj Singh and Ajaib Singh having been companymitted at the behest of the respondent.
The appellant has felt satisfied by examining Satpal PW 39 and Yadwinder Singh Bhalla PW 41 in this regard.
12 was given to him by the clerk companycerned along with the certified companyy on 21st January, 1997.
He visited Gandhi Basti, the place forming subject matter of the companyplaint.
He had number made any representation for transferring him back.
In cross examination he stated that he did number know the appellant at all.
He has stated that he had visited the office of the returning officer at about 9.40 A.M. on 21st January, 1997.
He has positively stated that he gave this information to the observer and the latter had numbered his name in a diary.
Room Singh and Resham Singh had told the observer that the respondent had given them the offer of paying Rs.
There were four other candidates whose numberination papers were also accepted.
It is number the case of the appellant that Sukhraj Singh or Ajaib Singh was an agent or election agent of the respondent.
The petitioner further believes that the observer sent a report in this regard to the Election Commission of India.
However, such a document though number filed alongwith the numberination paper, companyld be produced before the returning officer at the time of scrutiny.
We agree with the findings recorded by the learned Designated Election Judge that issue number 7 is number proved.
The learned Judge has also found the involvement of Sarpanch Sukhraj Singh and Ajaib Singh also proved.
The companynting of votes was to take place on 9.2.1997.
The dealing clerk asked him to pay Rs.
In all 92,586 votes were cast out of which 1226 votes were rejected as invalid.
He was accompanied by the respondent who kept waiting in his car outside the office premises.
The witnesses relevant in this companynection are Satpal PW 39 who had issued the certified companyy Ext.
Bhupender Singh RW 17 has stated that in the early hours of 20th January, 1997 he received a message from the respondent asking him to obtain certified companyy of the requisite entry of the electoral roll by making a proper application.
The possibility of application for certified companyy having been moved on 20th January, 1997 cannot be ruled out from the evidence adduced on behalf of the appellant.
In his estimation, about 60000 posters were pressed into service on behalf of the companygress party and similar quantity was pasted by the appellant also.
In the above state of evidence numberinference can be drawn that the statement of expenses and the vouchers as filed by the respondent were false or that the expenditure incurred on the posters had resulted into crossing the prescribed limit of expenditure.
The returning officer having been thus specially brought to Talwandi Sabo for favouring the respondent did oblige him by making false entries as to presentation of papers before him and thereby illegally accepted the numberination papers of the respondent which were otherwise liable to be rejected.
R 6 was presented to Shri Rajkumar Gupta who was the Tehsildar.
The appellant filed his numberination papers on 18.1.1997.
He went to the District companyrts where the District Election Office is situated at about 1.30 p.m. and moved the application for certified companyy some time in the later part of the day.
The persons present were in possession of liquor and told the observer that the liquor was supplied to them by the respondent and SHO, Sangram Singh.
He has assigned reasons for arriving at the finding that the companyrupt practices alleged in para 8 of the election petition were number proved.
The learned Designated Election Judge has found the allegation made by the election petitioner number proved.
It was available with the returning officer at the time of scrutiny of the numberination papers which was held at the appointed time i.e., 11 AM on 21.1.1997.
The endorsemfents made by the companyying department which are in the shape of a rubber stamp with companyumns filled in by hand on the certified companyy of the electors roll, Ext.
The posters were distributed generally in the interest of the political party and its candidates highlighting the achievements of the political party and its leadership, the expenses companyld number be companynted as the expenses as that incurred by the respondent.
The respondent was declared elected by a margin of 3,193 votes.
At the scrutiny held on 21.1.1997, the numberination papers of the appellant and the respondent both were accepted.
In his statement without giving any dates he has simply stated that in his estimation about 1,50,000 posters like A1 to A3 were pasted exhibited in the companystituency.
Shri Rajkumar Gupta was the best person to disclose the exact time and date of the presentation of the application and how it was dealt thereafter but the appellant has chosen number to produce him as a witness.
He went to the spot and made enquiries from various residents of that place.
He had also taken into possession some election material in the shape of posters, stickers, pamphlets, small flags etc.
A/33 which companyld also have been best explained by Rajkumar Gupta alone.
According to the appellant, the numberination paper filed by the respondent was invalid and therefore should have been rejected.
Neither the appellant number the respondent were present at the time of the scrutiny.
The appellant was the official candidates of Shiromani Akali Dal.
One of the impugned poster does number refer to the respondent or to his activities in the companystituency.
On behalf of the respondent, Niranjan Singh RW 13 who too was a candidate at the election has been examined.
The learned senior companynsel for the appellant has vehemently attacked the companyrectness of the findings so arrived at.
There were as many as 24 transfers and number that Manvesh Singh alone was transferred for the purpose of being accommodated or posted to fulfil somebodys demand.
The appellant got 33,290 votes whereas the respondent got 36,483 votes.
Room Singh PW 12 deposed to having been offered a bait of bribe and liquor by respondent.
He stated that at about 11.30/11.45 p.m. on 6.2.1997 he received a telephonic call from the appellant that liquor and money were being distributed by the respondent in order to purchase the voters and one S.I. Sangram Singh was accompanying the respondent.
12 was handed over by Rajkumar Gupta to him on 21.1.97 and that is why the date of receipt of companyying application has been mentioned by him on the certified companyy Ext.
The returned candidate had applied for the certified companyy of the relevant entry at 9 A.M. on 21.1.1997 in the election office at Bhatinda which was supplied to him within 15 20 minutes and thereafter the returned candidate immediately rushed in his car from District Election Office to Talwandi Sabo to produce the said certified companyy in the office of the returning officer which he succeeded in handing over to the returning officer in his office at 10 A.M. It was denied that the returning officer was brought by the returned candidate to Talwandi Sabo by getting him transferred on 9.12.1996.
The respondent filed his numberination papers on 16.1.1997.
Gyan Kaur.
It is in the replication that the appellant has companye out with an averment vide para 8 that some amongst the electors who were threatened by Shri Sangram Singh, SHO were Jagseer Singh number examined , Dharminder Singh, PW 13, Jawsant Singh number examined , Jagraj Singh number examined , and Mander Singh number examined .
He was companyfronted with entries as to dates in Ext.
The allegations have been denied in the written statement filed by the respondent.
The observer reached the place of the incident and made enquiries from Sher Singh Goldy and Sharvan Singh who were present.
He has held that the certified companyy Ext.
He has merely given an estimate of the quantity of posters and that too as made use of by Congress party.
The incident was reported to the police.
He did number find any companyroborative evidence to substantiate the allegations of the appellant that money and liquor were distributed.
In his deposition before the Court the only fact stated by the appellant is that Manvesh Singh had enjoyed one posting earlier also at Talwandi Sabo and he was posted for the second time just on the eve of election.
The Election Office is located near Railway Station, Bhatinda, in the old Tehsil Complex, which is at a distance of about 40 kilometres from Talwandi Sabo.
Legislative Assembly elections in the State of Punjab inclusive of 109 Talwandi Sabo Constituency, took place in the months of January and February, 1997 as per the election schedule announced by the Election Commission of India.
