f para.
On appeal the High Court held that the companyrupt practice had been proved and set aside the election of the appellant.
of the People Act, as amended provides that an election petition shall set forth full particulars of any companyrupt practice the petitioner alleges, including as full a statement as possible of the names of parties alleged to have companymitted such companyrupt practice and the date and place of the companymission of each such practice.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 9th January 1959 of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeal No.
Relying upon a judgment of the Allahabad High Court delivered on September 9, 1957, Mubarak Mazdoor v. K. K. Banerji and another 1 in which, the practice to be followed in dealing with allegations of companyrupt practices, made in an election petition, on the ground of vagueness, was enunciated the first respondent applied for review of that order.
The polling of votes took place on February 28, 1957, and the result of the election was declared on March 2, 1957.
It also held that if the Tribunal had numberpower of review, the High Court being itself seized of the matter, would be deemed to have set aside the first order of the Tribunal and made an order allowing the amendment.
6, at the last general elections held in 1957.
It is companytended that the hiring of the vehicle is an essential element of the companyrupt practice mentioned in this section.
The appellant had been declared elected at an election.
But all the evidence relating to the hiring and the time and place thereof, was without objection admitted on the record.
The first respondent filed an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to to have the appellants election declared void.
In the view of the High Court the testimony of A. P. Malik, the Presiding Officer at Naholi polling station, companyroborated by exh.
Dealing with the companyrupt practice set out in Cl.
Among other things it was said that the appellant had companymitted a companyrupt practice which was described in the petition substantially in these words In villages mentioned in annexure D the appellant hired a tractor for companyveying women electors from their houses to places of polling and back.
In Ann.
The appellant secured the highest number of votes and was declared duly elected.
A voter named Lakshmi Narain who will hereinafter be referred to as the first respondent submitted an application to the Election Commission of India to declare the election of the appellant Balwan Singh void on the ground inter alia that the appellant and or his election agent and or other persons with his companysent, had companymitted companyrupt practices and the result of the election was materially affected by such companyrupt practices companymitted in his interest.
The High Court held that the petition was defective in that it omitted to set out the date and place of the hiring of the tractor, which was proved to have been used for companyveying voters to the polling station, but numberprejudice was caused to the appellant as a result of that omission.
Later it made another order reviewing its earlier order and thereby cancelled that order.
22, a petition submitted on the date of the polling by one Raghuraj Singh, agent of Ram Dulari, a companytesting candidate, and further supported by the evidence of witness Kalika Prasad and another witness Raghuraj Singh, established that voters were companyveyed in a trailer attached to a tractor, at the instance of the appellant to the Naholi polling station, and that the evidence of one Hanuman Singh established the companytract of hiring the tractor used for companyveying voters to the polling station.
The appellant moved the High Court at Allahabad under arts.
227 of the Constitution, to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, challenging the companyrectness and propriety of the order ,of the Election Tribunal reviewing its order dated July 29, 1957.
S. Pathak, G. N. Dikshit, Udai Pratap Singh, P. Goval, M. S. Gupta and P. C. Aggarwala, for respondent No.
July 29, 1957, was unjust and improper , and the matter having been brought before it in a proceeding under art.
The respondent in his turn sought permission to give particulars of this companyrupt practice by amending his petition by the substitution of a new annexure to his petition marked DI in the place of the existing annexure D. The Election Tribunal first made an order refusing the, amendment and striking out the allegation as desired by the appellant.
K. Jha, P. Rama Reddy R. K. Garg and R. Patnaik for the appellant.
In an appeal under s. 116A of the Respresentation of the People Act, against the order of the Election.
The appellant submitted in rejoinder that by his application, the first respondent in substance sought number to amplify the particulars given by him, but to make allegations about fresh companyrupt practices, and prayed that several clauses including Cl.
226 and 227 of the Constitution against the latter order of the Tribunal.
On July 15, 1957, the first respondent applied for leave to amplify the particulars set out in the various clauses of para.
9 were restored, and Ann.
f of para.
227 of the Constitution, the High Court companyld rectify the error by setting aside the earlier order.
The companyrupt practice alleged is of the kind mentioned in s. 123 5 of the Act which is in these words The hiring or procuring, whether on payment or otherwise, of any vehicle or vessel by a candidate for the companyveyance of any elector to or from any polling station.
The High Court observed that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review its earlier order, and that in the circumstances of the case it was unnecessary to decide whether the order dated September 13, 1957, was properly passed, because the order dated.
9, the Tribunal observed that the companyrupt practice described in s. 123 5 of the Representation of the People Act, lies in the act of hiring or procuring vehicles by a candidate or his agent, and that this companyrupt practice is number companymitted merely by companyveying the voters, and as the particulars of hiring and procuring of the vehicles were number furnished in the petition, and the evidence adduced by the first respondent to support his case of hiring or procuring vehicles was unsatisfactory the case of the .first respondent about the companymission of a companyrupt practice by the appellant stood unsubstantiated.
By this order it directed the restoration of the allegation struck out and the substitution of annexure D by annexure DI.
The appellant led his evidence without any objection as to the petition being defective for want of any particulars.
In Cl.
9 be deleted.
Pursuant to the order passed by the High Court, the averments made in Cl.
f of para.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
By its order dated March 6, 1958, the High Court substantially companyfirmed the order passed by the Tribunal.
SHAH J. Three candidates, Balwan Singh hereinafter referred to as the appellant , Ram Dulari and Gaya Prasad, companytested the election to the U. P. Legislative Assembly from the Akbarpur Rural Assembly Constituency No.
and directed that certain paragraphs including Cl.
The appellant applied under Art.
February, 23.
In Sch.
D 1 was incorporated in the petition.
It is said that the election petition should have been dismissed because sufficient particulars of the companyrupt practice alleged had number been given in the petition.
I am leaving out of companysideration the procuring of a vehicle because that is number the case here.
He also submitted that the first respondent had number disclosed the names of the voters number the particulars of the companyveyances, and that the latter companyld number in view of the defective pleading be permitted to challenge the election of the appellant on that charge.
was delivered by Shah, J. Sarkar, J. delivered a separate Judgment.
D 1 in the petition.
The appellant by his written statement companytended that the averments made in Cl.
9 and Annexure D be struck off.
The Election Tribunal, by its order, dated September 13, 1957, accepted the plea of the first respondent for review of the order, and directed that the order dated July 29, 1957, beset aside.
By its order dated August 16, 1958, the Tribunal dismissed the petition holding that the first respondent failed to establish the companyrupt practices on which 1 13 E.L.R. 310 the petition was founded.
The parties then went to trial before the Tribunal.
f of para.
411 of 1959.
f and prayed for leave to amplify the recitals in that clause by incorporating Ann.
It is number even suggested that because of the absence of the particulars, the appellant was embarrassed in making his defence, or that he companyld number lead evidence relevant to the plea of companyrupt practice set up by the first respondent.
D, was set out a list of 30 villages.
f of para 9 of the petition, which is material for this appeal, it was averred by the first respondent, that in villages set out in annexure D, the appellant, his agents and workers with the companysent of the appellant, hired and procured bullock carts and tractors for companyveying women electors to and from the polling station.
448/A of 1958.
This election petition was referred for trial to the District Judge, Kanpur, who was companystituted the Election Tribunal for trying the petition.
The Judgment of Sinha, C. J. Imam, Wanchoo and Shah, JJ.
The appellant applied to have this allegation struck out as it did number companytain sufficient particulars of the companyrupt practice alleged.
The appellant did number appeal from this order of the High Court.
f of para.
9 were untrue that neither he number his agents or workers had ever hired or procured bullock carts or trucks to companyvey women voters from the villages set out in Annexure D or any other village to the polling station.
Tribunal the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad set aside the order and declared the election of the appellant void.
D 1, the first respondent set out the nature of the vehicles used, the names of the owners of the vehicles, the names of the villages from which women voters were companyveyed at the expense of the appellant to the polling station and back, the hire paid, and the description of the families to which the women voters who were companyveyed belonged.
Hence this appeal.
The Tribunal took the view that the companyrupt practice alleged had number been proved and dismissed the petition.
9, including the particulars set out in Cl.
Against the order passed by the High Court declaring the election of the appellant void, this appeal has by special leave been filed.
Section 83 1 b of the Representation.
