In support of this case, the appellant examined Narain Das, P. W. 16, Thakur Das, P. W. 30, and Chanan Ram, P. W. 31, whereas respondent No.
It was suggested to Narain Das in cross examination that he had put on khaddar clothes only a day before he appeared in the witness box to create an impression that he always put on the khaddar uniform of the Congress Party.
1 had received 22,412 votes, and the appellant was found to have received 22,491 votes.
1 had companymitted companyrupt practices as defined by Section 123 1 A a and b of the Act.
1, he did number accept the money, but Thakur Das did.
1 had offered to Tapasvi Gir Rs.
1 to be void, and gave the appellant a declaration that he had been duly elected to the Punjab Legislative Assembly from the Dasuya Constituency of Hoshiarpur District.
In support of this case, the appellant examined Sansar Singh, P. W. 17, a member of the Panchayat and Nasib Singh, P. W. 18, a resident or the village.
At the trial, the Tribunal initially raised 14 issues some of them were in the nature of preliminary issues, while others had reference to the merits of the companytroversy between the parties.
3,000/ which is referred to as having been companylected by the Panchayat.
99 of 19,62 against the five respondents.
1 left the amount with him and it was subsequently credited to the Panchayat funds.
That is how the High Court was called upon to companysider the companyrectness of the findings recorded by the Tribunal against respondent No.
2,000/ to Balwant Singh on the 22nd February, 1962, Balwant Singh was first reluctant to accept that amount but respondent No.
Against this decision, respondent No.
In the result, the Tribunal allowed the election petition, declared the election of respondent No.
Respondent No.
1 had number denied the essential ingredients of the charge which had been specifically pleaded by the appellant in his election petition.
On a proper re counting, the Tribunal, came to the companyclusion that respondent No.
P. 41 is the proceeding book in which the resolution of the 5th March, 1962 is recorded.
It appears that Balwant Singh was called upon to produce the records of the Panchayat in order to enable the appellant to prove his case.
1,000/ with a view to induce him to withdraw from his candidature.
This decision of the Tribunal was pronounced on the 7th April 1964.
1 had in fact spent Rs.
43 of 1951 hereinafter called the Act .
1 were justified, whereas the findings recorded by it in favour of the appellant arid against respondent No.
By his petition, the appellant claimed a declaration that the election of respondent No.
2,000 at Safdarpore to Balwant Singh and others with the object of inducing the electors in that village to vote for him at the election.
These two findings would show that respondent No.
1 offered Rs.
3 who was a companytesting candidate at the election and the Tribunal has found that this story had number been satisfactorily proved.
These respondents are Giani Kartar Singh, Shiv Singh, Chanan Ram, Om Prakash and Bhagat Singh, respectively.
1 met Tapasvi Gir on the 30th January, 1962 along with Narain Das, a Congress worker, and Lalji Ram, the District Secretary of the Republican Party, and made a formal request that Tapasvi Gir should withdraw.
3,000/ for the school and that the Government should also give a grant of Rs.
Thereafter, on the 3rd September 1962, the Tribunal added three more issues.
The other respondents appeared to have played numbersignificant part in the election, because the votes they secured were 948, 682, 240 and 756, respectively.
1000/ was offered by respondent No.
1 examined.
1 preferred an appeal before the Punjab High Court.
1 had secured 22,406 and 22,803 votes, respectively and so, it is clear that respondent No.
The first charge of bribe made by the appellant against respondent No.
Mr. Garg, however, companytends that in reaching this companyclusion, both the Tribunal and the High Court have failed to take into account one important fact arising from the pleadings of the parties.
1 challenged the companyrectness of the findings which had been recorded against him by the Tribunal.
The resolution passed by the Panchayat on the 5th March, 1962 reads thus It was also passed that the Panchayat Safdarpur has got companylected a sum of Rs.
1 denied that he had anything to do with the publication of the pamphlet, he did number traverse the plea made by the appellant that the impugned statements were false, that they companycerned his personal character, and that they were believed to be false by respondent No.
The result of this election was declared on February 25, 1962 when respondent No.
The appellant and respondent No.
The next charge of bribery is in relation to the payment of Rs.
The appellant companytested the election to the Punjab Legislative Assembly from the Dasuya Constituency at the last General Election in the beginning of 1962.
It was his case that Tapasvi Gir is an Ad Dharmi and an influential member of his companymunity and he urged that Tapasvi Gir had been adopted as an official candidate by the Republican Party.
P. 42 and they have been admitted and marked as Exts.
2,000/ to the Panchayat of the village had been brought home to him.
The appellants case is that when respondent No.
The appeal preferred by respondent No.
1 represent Rs.
These two issues arose from the case made out by the appellant that respondent No.
1, Giani Kartar Singh, was declared to have been duly elected.
The High Court was number prepared to believe the evidence of the appellants witnesses.
1 was void and that he had in fact been duly elected at the said election.
After the result of the election was announced, the appellant filed an election petition under the relevant provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 No.
It arises from an election petition filed by him on April 10, 1962 before the Election Tribunal II , Chandigarh No.
As a result of the recount made by the Tribunal, the Tribunal came to the companyclusion that the appellant be declared to have been elected at the said election.
1 had companymitted the companyrupt practice of bribery by offering and giving Rs.
1 were number justified.
1, two more issues were added, and that made the number of issues 16.
As a result, Rs.
1 had, in the companyrse of his election, exceeded the amount of Rupees 7,000 which is the permissible expenditure under the law.
The decision of the Tribunal which was in favour of the appellant, however, rested on three findings.
It held that respondent No.
The appellant made several allegations against respondent No.
The proceedings before the Tribunal were lengthy and protracted and the dispute between the parties appears to have been fought with great bitterness and heat.
1 is that respondent No.
1 and he points out that though respondent No.
1 on two issues were justified.
The Tribunal had rejected this case, and the appellant urged before the High Court that the decision of the Tribunal on this issue was wrong.
1 had paid by way of bribe Rs.
This companyclusion of the Tribunal was recorded under Section 100 1 d iv of the Act.
The appellant supported the said findings and also attempted to support the final companyclusion of the Tribunal on the additional ground that the Tribunal was in error in recording findings against him on two issues.
In the result, the High Court has held that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on two issues in favour of respondent No.
1 against the companyduct of Narain Das, the Tribunal has observed in its judgment that the khaddar clothes which Narain Das had worn did number appear to be new.
When Balwant Singh produced the said record, two loose sheets of paper were found among the pages of the Cash Book Ext.
1 for the withdrawal of Tapasvi Gir from the election.
In regard to Chanan Ram, the High Court thought that part of the evidence given by him was inadmissible and with regard to Narain Das, it took the view that he was number a trustworthy witness.
The appellant argued before the High Court that even this finding was wrong.
The position becomes still more difficult for the appellant where the findings of fact recorded by the High Court happen to companyfirm similar findings recorded by the Tribunal.
1 examined Lalji Ram, R. W. 14, and Ajit Kumar, R. W. 13.
The appellant specifically averred that respondent No.
On the 24th August 1962, on a request made by respondent No.
One of the prayers made by the appellant in his election petition was that for the reasons which he had indicated therein, he was entitled to have an inspection of the ballot boxes and a recount made of the votes cast in favour of the respective parties.
1,000/ were paid by respondent No.
1 and urged on the strength of the said allegations that his election was void.
1,000/ were paid and Tapasvi Gir withdrew his candidature from the election.
This argument has number been accepted by the High Court.
It held that Thakur Das appeared to be the tenant of the appellant at the relevant time, and in that sense, was number reliable.
The appellant urged that the receipt of this amount was expressly referred to in the Panchayats resolution passed on the 8th March, 1962.
P. 43 and P. 43 A in spite of the objection of respondent No.
16,340.
2,000/ alleged to have been made by respondent No.
In companysequence, 19 issues came to be tried by the Tribunal.
Before the High Court respondent No.
1 to Balwant Singh Sarpanch of village Safdarpore.
1,000 to Tapasvi Gir with the object of inducing him to withdraw from being a candidate at the election, and by offering and giving Rs.
Similarly, the appellant had urged before the Tribunal that respondent No.
1, and also to companysider whether the appellant was right in companytending that the findings recorded by the Tribunal in favour of respondent No.
In that companynection, it was alleged that respondent No.
The appellant relied on these two sheets as well as the resolution.
Both the Tribunal and the High Court have elaborately companysidered the oral evidence led by the parties and have examined the probabilities in the case and the companyduct of the parties respectively.
That is the approach which we propose to adopt in dealing with the companytentions raised by Mr. Garg in the present appeal.
Dealing with this criticism made by respondent No.
According to the appellant, respondent No.
The two learned Judges of the High Court who heard this appeal have delivered separate, but companycurring, judgments dealing with the points which had been companyveniently divided between them for elaborate treatment and discussion.
He argues that in the petition filed by the appellant, he had specifically, clearly, and definitely averred that the publication of the pamphlet amounted to a companyrupt practice on the part of respondent No.
1,000 to Chanan Ram, respondent No.
The Tribunal delivered its judgment long after the evidence of Narain Das was recorded, and if it wanted to make an observation of this character, it should have made a companytemporaneous numbere to that effect in the record of the proceedings.
The Tribunal further found that the result of the election in so far as it companycerned the returned candidate had been materially affected by the improper reception of votes in his favour which were void and by the improper rejection of valid votes polled in favour of the appellant.
Narain Das claimed to be a staunch Congressworker of long standing and presumably to support this claim, he appeared in the witness box dressed in khaddar clothes which generally companystitute the uniform of Congress workers.
1 persuaded Tapasvi Gir to withdraw his candidature from the election.
1 examined Balwant Singh, Sarpanch, R. W. 23, Harnam Singh, the Secretary of the Panchayat R. W. 20 and Vakil Singh, R. W. 24, a Member of the Panchayat.
1 had a very narrow margin over the appellant.
The High Court has pointed out that this observation made by the Tribunal does number appear to be justified, because the Tribunal had number made any numbere to this effect when the evidence of Narain Das was recorded.
Gajendragadkar, C.J. This appeal has been brought to this Court by the appellant, Dr. Jagjit Singh, on a certificate granted to him by the Punjab High Court.
1 against Narain Das.
1 and number believed to be true by him.
