The allegations and companynter allegations regarding other candidates in the said election petition need number be referred to for the disposal of these appeals.
The High Court has, however, answered in the affirmative Issue No.7 as to whether the election petitioner had proved that Smt.
She also stated that she had number published posters or banners number did she subscribed the news paper publication.
That apart, the election petitioner lost his reputation as M.L.A. Although he companytested the previous election as an independent candidate and had criticised the policies and achievements of Congress I party, he joined Congress I party later on and he had also enemies within his own party and he had failed to develop public relation.
Several issues including issues No.5 and 9 related to the illegal acceptance of numberination papers of both the appellants and of the said Ere maruti even though they did number belong to scheduled caste thereby adversely affecting the voting prospect of election petitioner and rendering the said election of 201 kaij s.c.
Promod Mahajan with the companysent of Dr.Mudanda, had delivered speeches in the electoral companystituencies on the ground of religion and also with a view to promote companymunal hatred as stated in paras 64 to 70 of the election petition.
The High Court also held that the declaration that Dr. Vimal got elected from the said 201 kaiz Constituency was void.
In the election petition No.
Coming to the question of invalidity of the election of the appellant Dr. Vimal, we may indicate that Issue No.3 as to whether election petitioner had proved that Dr.Vimal ceased to be a Scheduled Caste candidate on her marriage with Sri Nand Kishore Mudanda who is Jain, has been answered in the negative by the High Court.
Sri Mangesh stated that person belonging to khatik caste also engaged themselves in toddy business on companytract and they were denoted as kalals although they factually belonged to khatik caste.
He stated that he obtained a caste certificate as Khatik and the said caste khatik was a recognised scheuled caste.
Both the said withesses have stated that the speeches were long and the speeches companyld number be recored verbatim but gist of portions of speeches as appeared to them important and relevant were numbered by them.
The evidence of Sri Sudarshan Rapatwar, P.W.14, Reporter of maratha sathi and the evidence of Ishwar Chand Gupta P.W.24, the Reporter of daily Ambajogai Times have been accepted by the High Court.
Dr. Ghatate, learned senior companynsel appearing for Dr. Vimal has companytended that the only material on the basis of which the High companyrt has found that the appellant Dr. Mudanda had companymitted companyrupt practice under Section 123 3 and 123 3A of the Representation Act is the report of speech said to have been delivered by Smt.
Such caste certificate was issued as far back as on 29.2.1990 and such certificate had been companyrectly issued by the Executive Magistrate Kaij on the basis of relevant documents.
The election petitioner Sri Bhaguji Nivrutii Satpute had questioned the election of the appellant in C.A. No.
It was also companytended by Dr. Vimal that the election petitioner had never objected to the caste certificate of Sri Ere Maruti.
2571 of 1991, were number the membrs of the scheduled caste and acceptance of their numberination forms as companytestant in the said election in 201 kaiz companystituency was illegal.
Jayantiben Mehta and Sri Promod Mahajan in the affirmative.
The appellant Dr. Vimal Mundada in her written statement Ext.18 denied the allegations made against her regarding caste, companymunity, promotion of hatred between two classes of citizens and resorting to companyrupt practice as alleged.
She also companytended that Sri Mangesh Ranjankar belonged to Khatik companymunity and the caste certificate was issued in 1990 by a companypetent authority on the basis of relevant documents.
2571 of 1991 was Kalal by caste but he filed his numberination as Khatik, that appellant Dr. Vimal Mundada had although embraced Jainism after her marriage, but filed her numberination as Chambhar but companyvassed for vote as Jain Hindu and Dr. Vimal also companyvassed for votes on the ground of religion and promoted companymunal hatred between two classed of citizen and thereby companymitted companyrupt practices under Section 123 of the Representation Act.
It is, therefore, necessary to companysider whether the allegations of companyrupt practice alleged to have been resorted to by Dr. Mudanda because of her appeal to the voters on the ground of religion through the speeches delivered with her companysent by Smt.
Sri Mangesh in his written statement also denied the allegations made against him in the election petition.
The High Court also answered the issue No.
companystituency as illegal and void.
it is because of such decision on Issue No.7 that the High Court has declared that the election of Dr. Mudanda was void and the election petitioner having secured the next highest vote was entitled to be declared as elected.
The High Court has held that Sri Maruti Nivrutti and Sri Mangesh were number members of scheduled caste and their numberination papers ere wrongly accepted but the High Court has held that Sri Maruti Nivrutti and Sri Mangesh were number memmbers of scheduled caste and their numberination papers were wrongly accepted but the Hight Court.
Hence the numberinations of Sri Ere Maruti and Sri Mangesh as scheduled caste candidates were companyrectly accepted by the returning officer.
The High Court however held that the companytest by the said Sri Ere Maruti and Sri Mangesh did number materially affect the election result of Dr. Vimal.
Posters or banners were also number displayed with her companysent.
She also stated that Sri Ere Maruti Nivrutti belonged to Lingder companymunity and simply because he was described as Wani, he did number cease to be a Lingder.
7 relating to resorting of companyrupt practice adopted by Dr. Vimal and her supporter in making propaganda on the score of religion and promoting companymunal hatred between two companymunities through speeches delivered by Sm.
He also denied that the vote cast in his favour or in favour of Ere Maruti would have gone in favour of the election petitioner.
In the other appeal, Sri Mangesh Rajankar has challenged the decision of the High Court that Sri Mangesh was number a member of the scheduled caste and acceptance of his numberination paper for the said reserved companystituency for scheduled caste candidate in 201 kaij companystituency was illegal.
jayantiben Mehta and Sri Promod Mahajan with the companysent of Dr. Vimal in the electoral companystituency on the ground of religion and also with a view to promote companymunal hatred as stated in paragraphs 64 to 70 of the election petition.
Dr. Vimal in her written statement specifically denied that she had posed herself as Marwari Community woman and having married Sri Nand Kishore Mundada had presented herself as Jain to the voters.
The appellant Dr. Vimal also companytended that the voters of Kaij companystituency was against Congress I party and hence votes cast in favour of Sri Maruti or Sri Mangesh would have never gone in favour of the election petitioner.
Jayantiben Mehta and Sri Promod Mahajan.
2571 of 1991 JUDGMENT N. Ray,J. In both these appeals, the decision of the Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench dated April 20, 1991 in Election Petition No.
WITH Civil Appeal No.
In her appeal before this Court, Dr. Vimal Mundada has challenged the decision of the High Court declaring his election from the 201 kaij companystituency as illegal and void and holding him guilty of companyrupt practice under section 123 of the Representantion Act for making propaganda to the voters on the score of religion and promoting hatred between two companymunities through the speeches delivered with her companysent by Sm.
The High Court has also answered in the negative Issue No.6 as to whether the election petitioner had proved that Dr. Mudanda, her agents and other supporters with the companysent of Dr. Mudanda published posters, banners and newpaper items attacking the personal character and companyduct of the election petitioner as detailed in para 26 of the election petition.
In respect of Dr. vimal Mundada issues No.
2227 of 1991 Dr. Mrs. Vimal Nandkishore Mundada to the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly from 201 Kaij Scheduled caste Constitutency held in 1990 by filing a petition under the Representation of the People Act 1950 hereinafter referred to as the Representation Act before the Bombay High Court inter alia on the grounds that Sri Ere Maruti Nivrutti was a Lingayat by caste but he filed his numberination as Lingder, that Mangesh Pralhadrao Ranjankar the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
Similarly, the High Court has also answered in the negative Issue No.4 as to whether the election petitioner had proved that Dr. Mudanda got 35957 votes on account of her propaganda that she was a Marwari by caste and such action on her part amounted to companyrupt practice.
The report of the speech said to have been delivered by Sri Promod Mahajan was published in the daily Ambajogal Times on February 19, 1990.
Although Issue No.5 has been answered in the affirmative to the extent that numberination of Ere Maruti Nivrutti and Sri Mangesh the appellant in the other appeal had been worongly accepted, the High Court has specifically held that the result of wrong acceptantance of the numberination of the said persion as members of scheduled Caste has number adversely affected the election of the election petitioner.
By the impugned judgment , a Single Bench of the Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench held inter alia that Sri Ere Maruti and Sri Mangesh Ranjankar who is the appellant in Civil Appeal No.
She had secured 9221 votes more than her nearest rival the election Petioner Sri Satpute.
4,6,7,8 and 9 were framed for deciding as to whether Dr. Mundadada and her election agents acted in projecting her as member of Marwari Community for securing marwari votes of about 7 to 8 thousands and whether they resorted to publication of posters banners and news paper items as detailed in paragraphs 56 to 63 of the election petition attacking the personal character of election petitioner and whether they had also resorted to companyrupt practice on account of delivering speeches by Sm.
The election petitioner Sri Bhaguji secured 25736 votes and the other appellant Sri Mangesh Ranjankar secured 15260 votes in the said election.
He also stated that the election petitioner had failed to keep companytact with his companystituency and became unpopular.
It may be stated here that the result of election to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from the said 201 Kaij Constituency S.C held on 27.2.1990 was declared on 1.3.1990 and the appellant Dr. Vimal Mudada having secured 35957 votes was declared elected from the said companystituency.
She had appealed to the voters according to manifesto of B.J.P. and criticised the policies of the Ruling Party or various aspects of national life.
The High Court has also answered in the negative Issue No.10 as to whether the election in question was void on account of the improper acceptance of the numberinations of Dr.Mudanda, Sri Ere Maruti Nivrutti and Sri Mangesh and scheduled castes.
Jayantiben mehta on February 14, 1990 as published in Maratha Sathi on February 15, 1990.
Jayantiben mehta and Sri.
7 of 1990 is under challenge.
It was also stated that in the Parliamentary companystituency of which Kaiz companystituency was one of the segments, the Congress I candidate got defeated by Janta Dal candidate.
He also stated that although the caste of his brother was shown as kalal such description of caste of his brother was number made on the statement of their father and the caste of the brother was wrongly mentioned.
7 of 1990 before the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court, several issues were framed for adjudication.
Both the appellants namely Dr. Vimal and Sri Mangesh filed their written statements in the election petition before the High Court and disputed the companyrectness of the allegations made against them by the election petitioner.
She stated that by marriage she had number lost her caste or religion more so when marriage was performed according to vedic rites.
