It is number established that they had any reason to speak against the appellant As against their evidence the appellant has examined R.W. 4, Kalika Prasad R.W. 16, Babu Ram and R.W. 17, Ram Shanker Ojha Both Babu Ram and Ram Shanker admitted in their cross examination that they worked for the appellant during the election.
Five candidates companytested the election.
He was the Finance Minister in the U.P. Government when the S.V.D. was in power.
There is companyvincing evidence on this point at least in respect of three meetings held at Sandalpur, Baraur and Rajpur respectively on February 2, 1969.
These witnesses companytradict each other on various material particulars.
So far as Sandalpur meeting is companycerned, there is evidence of P W. 23, Nathu and P.W. 24, Radhey Shyam.
The poll took place on February 5, 1969.
The other grounds alleged against the election of the appellant were negatived by the High Court.
Evidence was also led to show that the principal objective of Arjak Sangha was to denounce the Brahmins and Brahminism.
According to the allegations companytained in the election petition, respondent No.
It was a companymunal organisation The membership of that association was companyfined to those who are born in the so called lower castes like Kurmi, Yadava, Kori, Chamar, Mallah, Gadaria and Hari jans.
Both of them appear to be disinterested witnesses.
Their evidence has been accepted by the trial Court.
The appellant was elected to the U.P. Legislative Assembly in the General Election in 1967 on the S.S.P. ticket.
Ram Dulare Misra, respondent No.
The activities of that Sangha were primarily directed for the companysolidation of these castes as against the upper classes in general and Brahmins in particular.
The allegation of Onkar Nath is that after the fall of the S.V.D. Government the appellant formed an association called Arjak Sangha.
The appellant was declared elected having secured 36997 votes as against 22198 votes secured by Misra.
In support of this plea several witnesses have been examined on behalf of the first respondent.
The election of the appellant was challenged by the respondent Onkar Nath, a voter in the companystituency on various grounds.
2 in this appeal was the companygress numberinee.
The High Court set aside the election of the appellant on the ground that he was guilty of companyrupt practices Under Section 123 3 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The evidence of Kalika Prasad did number impress the trial Court.
The appellant stood as an independent.
It is also alleged that during the election the appellant as well as B.P. Maurya spoke at several election meetings hurling abuses against the Brahmin companymunity, highlighting the exploitation by that companymunity in the past and requesting the voters number to vote to Misra who was a Brahmin but to cast their votes to the appellant who is a Kurmi.
The companytest was mainly between the appellant and respondent No.
It is clear from their evidence that they were number present at the meeting.
2 was the brain behind this Sangha and its principal spokesman.
It was said that this Sangha under the guidance of the appellant carried on virulent propaganda against the Brahmins before the election, during the election as well as thereafter.
It relates to the mid term election in 1969 to the U.P. Legislative Assembly from Rajpur companystituency in the District of Kanpur.
S. Hegde, J. This is an election appeal Under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
