According to him Harchand Singhs name was included in the list Exh.
3 at Muktsar at about S P.M. He attended the meeting.
One of the statements in the article was that Indira Congress was an anti Sikh organisation.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil appeal No.
The petitioner appellant filed the election petition on 16th July, 1980, and on 14th October, 1980 the petition was dismissed.
Polling was held on 31st May, 1980 and the result was declared on 1st June, 1980 in which the appellant secured 29600 votes and respondent No.
It is further alleged that on 16th November, 1979, Hukamnama was issued by Akal Takht on its official letter head with religious symbol and seal wherein punishment was imphsed by Akal Tkht on Jathedar Jagdev Singh Talwandi and Jathedar Umra Nangal.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. The appellant and the respondents companytested the election to Punjab Legislative Assembly held in May, 1980 from Muktsar Constituency.
This is companyroborated by Exh.
Respondent No.
In cross examination he stated that about 10 to 15 Hindus were present.
He also companyroborated that respondent No.
In cross examination, he admitted that he did number meet the petitioner till the date of his evidence and numberone approached him to find out as to whether he attended the meeting or number.
There were articles in Akali Times by Surjit Singh, Chief Editor on 16th May, 1980.
The names of seven members were given which included Sant Harchand Singh Ji Longowal, S. Jagdev Singh Ji Talwandi, S. Parkash Singh Ji Badal and others.
Respondent No.
In cross examination he stated that he owned thirty acres of land and his village was at a distance of two miles from village Khokhar.
He reiterated in his cross examination that Shri Badal told the audience that they should vote for respondent No.
3 because he had been set up a candidate of Akal Takht.
The latter two witnesses belonged to village Harika Kalan.
There were in all eight candidates companytesting from Barhara Constituency.
The poll day was 15th February, 1967.
1 thereafter, he made a number of ALLEGATIONS of diverse companyrupt practices giving particulars thereof in more than ten schedules.
3 also spoke.
On 25th May, 1980, it was further alleged that election meeting was held at Muktsar.
The said document further stated that a seven member companymittee was being companystituted for distribution of tickets and adjustments with other parties in the companying Lok Sabha elections.
That public meeting was addressed by Chaman Lal Joghi, Raj Kumar Girdhar, Roshan Lal Joshi, Paras Ram Bagga, Jagroop Singh and by him.
3 showed a paper and described it as a Hukamnama issued by the Akal Takht.
He stated that he had been given a ticket because he was a Gur Sikh and it was the religious duty of the Sikhs to vote for him, and he also showed some back issues of Akali Times and said that most of the things were written in these papers but he wanted to give a gist of the same.
His evidence was more in companyroboration with what has been stated.
The result was declared on 1st June, 1980.
These articles were to the effect that it was a religious companymitment for every Sikh to cast his vote for Akali Dal or to the candidate supporter by the Akali Dal.
There certain statements were made with which we shall deal later.
2 1964 7 S.C.R. p, 790.
3 was declared elected.
He was cross examined but numberhing very substantial came out of it.
3 was one R. W. 6.
Respondent No.
Shri Dayal Singh gave evidence on behalf of the appellant and he claims to be the Secretary of Akali Dal of which the President was Jagdev Singh Talwandi.
The audience, according to him, companysisted of 75 per cent of the Hindus and 25 per cent of the Sikhs.
He further stated that there was good work done by respondent No.3 and he would companytinue to do so if he was elected.
It follows therefore that an appeal to vote for respondent No.
Gurmit Kaur wife of Malkiat Singh.
The other facts stated by him are number relevant on this point.
He stated in his cross examination that four or five persons belonging to his village had accompanied him to the meeting.
According to him this meeting was addressed by Shri Parkash Singh Badal, ex Chief Minister, Punjab, Sant Harchand Singh Longowal and respondent No.
P 4/1 On 5th May, 1980 the last date for withdrawal of candidature expired.
At the time of the general election in February, 1967, the appellant was the Minister of State in the Finance Department of the State of Bihar.
3, the elected candidate.
There was companyroboration of the evidence of this witness.
He however did number hear the speech of the respondent No.
On 14th May, 1980, election meeting was addressed in village Thandwala by S. Parkash Singh Badal, a member of the seven Member Ad hoc Committee appointed by the Akal Takht and by respondent No.
The next meeting which is material is the meeting at Khokhar.
His village falls in Muktsar companystituency and he stated that S or 6 days before the date of the poll, a meeting was organised by the supporters of respondent No.
3 in village Harika Kalan about 5/6 days before the date of polls at village Gurdwara.
3 in the name of Akal Takht with all the companysequences of Hukamnama of Akal Takht was highlighted before the electorate.
The learned Judge has rejected the evidence on ground of improbability and on the ground that the evidence was number satisfactory because the witnesses had number stated that version to the appellant number were these allegations mentioned in the petition.
Respondent No.
He admitted that he himself was relative of Shri Parkash Singh Badal his daughter was married to the younger brother of Shri Badal.
Indisputably he was present at the meeting.
The first one making the statement regarding the meeting at Harika Kalan as well as meeting at village Khokhar.
He also admitted that he was a member of the Communist Party of India Marxist .
3 himself.
A Krishan Kumar son of Shri Jagan Nath who was also a Municipal Commissioner, Muktsar was R.W. 2 and he spoke in favour of respondent No.
He also said that right to vote was a sacred trust in favour of the panth and whoever exercised this right against the order issued by the Panth, would he regarded as a traitor to the panth.
He said that the supporters of respondent No.
3 addressed the meeting.
Being aggrieved by the said decision and judgment of the learned Judge, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant under section 116A of the said Act.
During the eighteenth century, meetings of Sarbat khalsa were invariably held at Shri Akal Takht twice a year on Baisakhi and Diwali days.
Respondent No.
He mentioned the Gurus.
P 4 at page 22 of Part II of the Paper Book was alleged to have been issued by Akal Takht on its official letter head bearing its religious symbol and seal.
It is deposed by P.W. 12 that Sant Harchand Singh Longowal also made a similar speech.
3 secured 30003 votes.
3 states in his evidence that he was number originally a candidate of Akali Dal but his candidature was taken up at a subsequent stage and he was given a ticket by the seven member companymittee to companytest the election.
1, the appellant was declared elected.
This Hukamnama gives approval to the aforesaid proposal and made an official announcement that the seven Member Ad hoc Committee would from that date take upon all the responsibilities of the Shiromani Akali Dal.
P2 at pages 19 and 20 of Part I1 of the Paper Book.
3419 NCE of 1981 From the Judgment and order dated the 14th October, 1981 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Election Petition No.
up as a candidate under the orders of the Akal Takht and it was the religious duty of the Sikhs to vote for him.
He stated that any Sikh who cast his vote in favour of Indira Congress did number deserve to be called a Sikh.
P 3 and appears at page 21 of Part II of the Paper Book.
3 spoke and said that he was a candidate of Akal Takht and it was the duty of the Sikhs to vote for him.
He further stated that 2 or 3 days after the meeting, the appellant had visited his village and solicited his vote but he had replied that he had made a tour of 2/3 villages along with panthak candidate and for that reason he was number in a position to promise to cast his vote for him.
He said that A he did number know if it was an offense to ask people to vote on the ground of religion.
The next village is village Harika Kalan about which P. W. 19 Guranditta Singh gave evidence.
S. Grewal and R. A. Gupta for the Respondent.
Shri Longowal and respondent No.
3 had companyvened a meeting at Khokhar at about 12 numbern about 6 or 7 days prior to the date of poll.
This letter companytains the proposal of some leaders of Akali Party about the formation of seven Member Ad hoc Committee and disbanding of the Working Committee of the Akali Dal.
1 I am of the opinion that a proper reading of that decision would indicate that for a proper verification of an affidavit or a petition based on certain information, the source should be indicated but I do number wish to examine this question any further because numberobjection at the initial stage was taken and specially in view of this Courts decision in Ziyauddin Burhanuddin Bukhari v. Brijmohan Ramdas Mehra and ors.3 and Shri Baldev Singh Sibia addressed the meeting.
According to him 10 or 12 Hindus were also present in the meeting.
P. W. 20 deposed that an election meeting was held by the supporters of res pondent No.
The learned Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on an analysis of the nature of the Hukamnama as well as examination of the evidence adduced before him came to the companyclusion that neither was it established that respondent No 3 had appealed in the name of religion in terms of section 123 of the Act number was the learned Judge companyvinced about the veracity or the companyrectness of the evidence adduced on behalf of the appellant as to what happened in the three meetings.
The respondent No.3 called one Balla Singh, Sarpanch resident of Harika Kalan, P. W. S and Smt.
He also showed one paper to the audience which according to him was a Hukamnama issued by the Akal Takht.
His village also fell in Muktsar companystituency and he spoke that in the Gurdwara of village Khokhar, meeting was held at about 12 numbern.
3 addressed the meeting first.
3 had indulged in companyrupt practice in the said election and as such his election was liable to be set aside and he was liable to be disqualified for companyrupt practice.
Sant Harchand Singh Ji Longowal was appointed as Chairman of the Committee.
3 was challenged by an election petition alleging that the respondent No.
He would have been the best person to deny the allegations made about that meeting.
F In the election petition filed by respondent No.
This meeting was admittedly addressed by Shri Parkash Singh Badal and respondent No.
The witness for respondent No.
She was Smt.
To prove meeting at Harika Kalan statement of three witnesses Guranditta Singh, W. 19, Sant Singh s o Arjan Singh, P. W. 20 and Gurdev Singh s o Bhajan SIngh, P. W. 21 were relied.
Both the witness were interested in him.
On 29th February, 1980, a letter was written which is Exh.
At the outset he tendered an apology to the audience and said that he had promised to bring Shri Prakash Singh Badal to address this meeting but he companyld number companye as he was busy with the election work in other companystituencies.
P and appears at pages 17 and 18 of Part II of the Paper Book stated that in view of the resignations tendered to the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht, on 27th September, 1979, certain decisions were taken.
At these gatherings, unanimous resolutions used to be passed which were known as Gurmatas.
According to him, Hindus outnumbered Sikhs by three times.
Gurmit Kaur resident of Khokhar P. W. 6.
W. 13 also gave evidence about the meeting at Muktsar.
As against this, the following facts will have to be borne in mind Shri Prakash Singh Badal had number chosen to companye and deny the allegations.
3 and Shri Baldev Singh Sibia addressed this meeting.
3 as he had left the meeting before that.
P.W. 29/A and number Exh.
On 1st March, 1980 Hukamnama which is Exh.
There was thus a difference OF 403 votes in favour of the respondent No.
The above said Hindu gentlemen belonged to the Janata Party whereas Jagroop Singh belonged to the Communist Party.
Shri Badal had merely said that he had been the Chief Minister of the State for a long time and if he was elected, he would serve the people well.
3 accompanied by Shri Baldev Singh Sibia and 4/5 other persons had companye to attend the meeting.
Having obtained 21,791 votes against 20,243 votes obtained by respondent No.
The next witness was P. W. 18, Malkiat Singh.
Thereafter, respondent No.
The election of respondent No.
In cross examination there was number much damage done to his testimony.
31st May, 1980 was the date of polling.
Similar statement was made by Makhan Singh, P. W. 17 regarding the meeting at Khokhar.
His village falls in Muktsar companystituency.
This point was examined by a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Padmabati Dasi v. Rasik Lal Dhar.
3 himself was the next person C who gave evidence in support of himself.
Here also P. W. 17 Makhan Singh gave evidence.
The other candidates got only numberinal votes.
He more or less reiterated what was stated by the other witnesses.
The allegations against respondent No.
P.W. 12, Hardam Singh gave evidence about Muktsar.
He said that Shri Parkash Singh Badal visited Muktsar on 25th of May, 1980 and addressed a public meeting there.
These appear as Exh.
3 was given ticket by the seven Member Ad hoc Committee for Muktsar Constituency.
Respondent No.
He denied the suggestion that he was number present at that meeting.
The learned Judge referred to the view taken by P.C. Jain, J. in election Petition No.
The meeting was held in the village Gurdwara.
P 29/A because 2nd May, 1980 was the last date for submitting numberination and on 3rd May, 1980, respondent No.
I.L.R. XXXVII Calcutta 259 at 260 and Hardwari Lal v. Kanwal Singh, 1972 2 S.C.R. 742 followed.
According to him, Shri Fatanwalia and Shri Badal spoke but they spoke about the achievements of their party and numberappeal was made in the name of Akal Takht or in the name of religion.
Me companyroborated that Shri Parkash Singh Badal, Harchand Singh Longowal and respondent No.
The next witness was P. W. 19, Guranditta Singh.
40 of 1980 Soli J. Sorabji, K. P. Bhandari S. C. patel and Dr. Ruksana Swamy for the appellant.
He spoke of a meeting about 5/6 days prior to the date of poll and the meeting was held at about numbern time in the village Gurdwara n village Khokhar.
3 was a numberinee of Akal Takht by numberless a person than the former Chief Minister of the State in the presence of the candidate himself 2 the candidate himself made the said statement.
