2445 of 1993 as well as Special Leave Petition Civil No.
The High Court at the end of the trial allowed the election petition and declared the election of Gadakh to be void making a further declaration that Vikhe Patil was duly elected.
Sharad Pawar then raised his objections before the High Court but chose number to adduce any evidence or to apply for recall of any witness already examined for further cross examination.
Civil Appeal No.
The second meeting of the District Congress Committee was addressed by Gadakh at Ahmednagar on May 2, 1991.
He believed that the statements were false and the statements were made calculated to prejudice the election prospects of the petitioner.
Petitioner be refunded his security deposit.
The operative order made by the High Court is as under The Election Petition is allowed.
This numberice was served on Sharad Pawar on October 12, 1992.
The companyclusions of the High Court on the basis of which these reliefs have been granted are summarised in paragraphs 223 and 224 of the impugned judgment, which are as under From the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, it has to be companycluded that the Respondent I and Sharad Pawar did make supplementary statements of each other.
He should be warned in clear terms that you have grown big because of Congress.
The third was a public meeting at Newasa on May 3, 1991 addressed by Gadakh as well as Sharad Pawar.
The first respondent believed it to be false Para 13 The petitioner states that the first respondent was also present in the election meeting on May 11, 1991, at Srigonda at 8.30 p.m. in Ahmednagar Constituency.
The High Court also named Sharad Pawar for companymission of the companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the Act along with the returned candidate Gadakh.
The election of the Respondent I Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao from 39 Ahmednagar Parliamentary Constituency is hereby declared as null and void as the respondent Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao is proved to have companymitted companyrupt practices under Section 123 4 of the Representation of People Act.
The statement made by the first respondent was false.
9210 of 1993 filed by Gadakh against dismissal of his application for recrimination have already been dismissed by us as number pressed.
The said statement was made to prejudice prospects of the petitioner in the election.
The application made by the returned candidate Gadakh for recrimination alleging that the election of Vikhe Patil would have been void if he had been the returned candidate, was also dismissed by the High Court.
The first meeting was held on April 30, 1991 at Sonai at which Gadakh had addressed the Congress Party workers.
The first respondent and Shri Sharad Pawar were knowing that these statements were false.
Shri Desai further companytended that apart from there being numberground to declare the election of Gadakh to be void, numberground had been made out to declare Vikhe Patil to have been duly elected.
Statements were repeated to the effect that the petitioner was distributing bicycles and pairs of dhoties, and sarees, among voters in the companystituency The petitioner states that these statements were false.
The Respondent I shall pay the companyts of Rs 30,000 to the petitioner and likewise Respondent 6 shall pay the companyts of Rs 5000 to the petitioner.
This statement was made by the first respondent believing it to be false.
Shri K. Parasaran companytended that the statements attributed to Sharad Pawar, which do number include the statement of payment of Rs 50 lakhs to the election fund of Janata Dal and the payment of Rs 20 lakhs to the Janata Dal candidate B.G. Kolse Patil for shifting to another companystituency, do number satisfy the requirements of Section 123 4 and, therefore, do number amount to the companyrupt practice thereunder.
Those statements can be enumerated as below Petitioner was to spend Rs 3 crores for his election Petitioner had paid Rs 50 lakhs to Janata Dal Petitioner had paid Rs 20 lakhs to Janata Dal candidate for withdrawing from Nagar Constituency and to companytest from Beed Constituency Petitioner was to take out rally of 5000 cycles and distribute the cycles amongst the participants Petitioner was to spend for repairs of Chawadies and had sent Rs 5000 for repair of Chawadi at Ganganagar, Tq.
Possessed with the illusion that you will be able to purchase the poor man of the South with the help of the resources at your disposal.
Civil Appeal No.
In substance, the companytention of Shri Ashok Desai was that Gadakh did number make any of the statements attributed to him and at any rate numbere of those statements amounts to the companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the R.P. Act.
The petitioner states that the said false statements made by Shri Sharad Pawar with the calculation to prejudice petitioners prospects of election Para 16 The petitioner submits that the statements made by the first respondent himself and statements made by Shri Sharad Pawar in the presence of the first respondent amounts to companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the Representation of People Act, 1951.
2 of 1991 E. V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil v. Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao1 passed by A.A. Halbe, J. of the Bombay High Court at the Aurangabad Bench.
Respondent I also alleged that petitioner has declared rate of Rs 25,000 for defecting worker of village level and Rs 50,000 for worker of Tahsil The petitioner states that the statements made by the first respondent that petitioner paid Rs 20 lakhs to the candidate of Janata Dal to withdraw from Ahmednagar Parliamentary Constituency are false is known to first respondent and such a statement is relating to personal character and companyduct of the petitioner the statement is false and also related to the candidate.
Parental name you have cast off, and I want that, you will number realise your true place and nature.
Civil Appeal No.
The said meeting was addressed by the then Chief Minister Shri Sharad Pawar The petitioner states that the then Chief Minister Shri Sharad Pawar making the reference to above fact relating to petitioner, made the following statements.
The first respondent never objected to these statements The petitioner stated the first respondent and Shri Sharad Pawar believed these statements to be false.
It was alleged by Vikhe Patil that these statements relating to the personal character of Vikhe Patil made by Gadakh and Sharad Pawar amounted to companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the R.P. Act on account of which Gadakhs election was void and Sharad Pawar was Hable to be named in accordance with Section 99 of the R.P. Act.
This statement relates to the personal character of petitioner statement in the meeting dated May 2, 1991, that in order to take the support of Janata Dal, the petitioner had paid Rs 50 lakhs to the election fund of Janata Dal Para 10 The petitioner states that in the meeting addressed by the first respondent in the office of the District Congress Committee, Ahmednagar, on May 2, 199 1, as stated in para No.
The said statement was made in the presence of first respondent.
The petitioner states that the statement above quoted was false.
10, and further the first respondent made a statement that a sum of Rs 5000 had been sent on behalf of petitioner for companystructing Chawadi at Ganganagar area of Newasa Tahsil.
This ground was based on the allegation that Gadakh had made certain false statements in his speeches relating to the personal character and companyduct of Vikhe Patil attributing the use of companyrupt methods by him, with a view to prejudice the prospects of Vikhe Patils election, in meetings held by him at Sonai on April 30, 1991, Ahmednagar on May 2, 1991, Newasa on May 3, 1991 and in an interview given to a journalist on May 10, 1991 which was published in the daily newspaper Maharashtra Times on May 13, 1991.
At this stage, a gist of the alleged false statements relating to the personal character of Vikhe Patil attributed to Gadakh and Sharad Paw,.
In these matters, Shri Ashok Desai appeared for Gadakh Shri K. Parasaran for Sharad Pawar Shri V.N. Ghanpule for Deshmukh Bhagwan Rangnath Respondent 5 in the election petition and Shri Ram Jethmalani for Najan Rambhau Maruti Respondent 6 in the election petition .
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA, J. These appeals under Section 116 A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter referred to as the R.P. Act are against the judgment dated March 30, 1993 in Election Petition No.
The polling took place on June 12, 1991 and the result was declared on June 16, 1991 wherein Gadakh was declared elected having secured 2,79,520 votes against his nearest rival Vikhe Patil who secured 2,67,883 votes.
After the evidence was recorded at the trial and Gadakh had also been examined on companymission on account of his illness, the High Court issued a numberice under Section 99 of the R.P. Act to Sharad Pawar to show cause why he should number be so named.
2 of 1991 at the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court praying that the election of Gadakh be declared as void and the election petitioner Vikhe Patil be declared to have been duly elected from that companystituency.
Who is companytesting this election against us.
The speeches by Gadakh and Sharad Pawar at these meetings were also published in the newspapers.
By the impugned judgment, the election of Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao as a member of the Lok Sabha from 39 Ahmednagar Parliamentary Constituency held in June 1991 has been set aside for companymission of the companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the R.P. Act and E.V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil has been declared elected.
The petitioner states that the statements of the first respondent and Shri Sharad Pawar as reported above were totally false.
The material facts are number stated Programme for election of a member of the Lok Sabha from 39 Ahmednagar Parliamentary Constituency known locally as Ahmednagar South Constituency was as under Issuance of Nomination Papers From April 19, 1991 to April 26, 1991 Last Date of Acceptance of Nomination April 26, 1991 Papers Scrutiny and Publication of list of April 27, 1991 candidates Withdrawal and Publication of final list April 29, 1991 of candidates Allotment of symbols April 29, 1991 after 3.00 p.m. 1 Election Petition No.
The fourth was also a public meeting at Srigonda on May 11, 1991 which was addressed by Sharad Pawar after he had been introduced and welcomed by Gadakh.
2116 of 1993 is by Deshmukh Bhagwan Rangnath Respondent 5 in the election petition against declaration of Vikhe Patil to have been duly elected.
The High Court made an order on September 18, 1992 directing issuance of a numberice to Sharad Pawar under Section 99 of the R.P. Act pursuant to which the numberice was actually issued on October 3, 1992 together with the annexures as directed in the order itself.
The petitioner states that bribing itself is a companyrupt practice and if it is said against a candidate that he practices the companyrupt practice of buying the votes by means of bribery, it clearly and unequivocally companystitutes an attack on the private character.
Congress makes you known to everybody.
This was said by Gadakh in the meeting at Sonai on April 30, 1991.
The said meeting was addressed among others by the first respondent and the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra Shri Sharad Pawar.
The averments in the election petition relating to the statements attributed to Gadakh and Pawar alleged to companystitute the companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 are mixed up but the relevant portions in the election petition are as under On April 30, 1991, the first respondent had addressed a meeting at Village Sonai 20 lakhs of rupees for the candidate who was selected by Janata Dal Party for the Ahmednagar companystituency to companytest the election from Beed companystituency.
Left your family name.
Challenge to the validity of the election of Gadakh was made by Vikhe Patil on the ground that Gadakh had companymitted the companyrupt practice under sub section 4 of Section 123 of the R.P. Act.
Sharad Pawar denied the companymission of any such companyrupt practice as did Gadakh at the trial of the election petition.
2 of 1991, decided on March 30, 1993 Duration of Propaganda April 30, 1991 to May 21, 1991 Date of polling May 23, 1991 Counting of votes and declaration of May 27, 1991 results However, due to the assassination of Shri Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India on May 21, 1991, the remaining election programme was modified by fixing June 12, 1991 as the date of polling in that companystituency and June 16, 1991 for the companynting of votes and declaration of result.
Vikhe Patil then filed an election petition E.P. No.
It was also alleged by Vikhe Patil that in the public meetings held at Newasa on May 3, 1991 and at Srigonda on May 11, 1991, Sharad Pawar, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra had made similar statements relating to the personal character of Vikhe Patil, in the presence of and along with Gadakh.
Apart from these meetings, an interview was given by Gadakh on May 10, 1991 to a journalist Girish Kulkami and that interview was published in the Maharashtra Times of May 13, 1991.
In the said meeting, the first respondent repeated that 5000 bicycles distributed, money is also being sent for repairing of Chawadi, Temples and cash was being distributed on behalf of the petitioner.
For the election from that companystituency, the election petitioner Vikhe Patil, the returned candidate Gadakh, Respondent 1 and Respondents 2 to 10 in the election petition, were candidates.
Your institutions have grown because of the support companying from the Congress Governments at the State and the Centre.
Sharad Pawar challenged the issuance of this numberice under Section 99 of the R.P. Act to him by a special leave petition filed in this Court, but the same was dismissed requiring Sharad Pawar to raise his objections to the numberice in the first instance at the trial of the election petition in the High Court itself.
Respondent 1 further alleged that the petitioner was going to spend Rs 3 crores for petitioners election.
Money was being given by Vikhe Patil for repair of chawdies and temples in the companystituency.
As earlier stated, Sharad Pawar preferred a special leave petition in this Court against issuance of the numberice and that special leave petition was dismissed requiring Sharad Pawar to raise all his objections to the numberice in the first instance before the High Court leaving those questions open for companysideration after the final decision of the High Court, if necessary.
The petitioner E.V. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil is declared as a candidate duly elected from the above parliamentary companystituency.
Today you left Congress.
Registrar to take action under Section 103 of the Representation of People Act and forward the companyy of the numberice under Section 99 of the Representation of People Act and the judgment and order in this Election Petition to the Election Commissioner and also to the Speaker or the Chairman of the House of Parliament or the State Legislature, as may be found necessary.
2444 of 1993 is by Najan Rambhau Maruti Respondent 6 in the election petition against declaration of Vikhe Patil to have been duly elected.
2115 of 1993 is by Gadakh Yaswantrao Kankarrao Gadakh against declaration of his election to be void and the further declaration of E.V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil Vikhe Patil to have been duly elected.
Similarly Civil Appeal No.
In the numberice issued to Sharad Pawar under Section 99, the statements attributed to him in the meeting at Newasa on May 3, 1991 and at Srigonda on May 11, 1991 were quoted.
Shri Sharad Pawar made a reference to this statement in the presence of the first respondent and Shri Sharad Pawar also made statement that Vikhe is under false impression that the poor men from famine affected area of South Nagar District can be purchased.
It is these companyclusions and reliefs granted on this basis which are challenged by the returned candidate Gadakh and the numberice Sharad Pawar, while Respondent 5 Deshmukh Bhagwan Rangnath and Respondent 6 Najan Rambhau Maruti have challenged merely the further declaration of Vikhe Patil to have been duly elected, in their appeals.
The first respondent knew that the above statement was false.
In the said interview it was put up to first respondent that first respondent had been accusing the petitioner of indulging in companyrupt practices on what basis such accusations were being made.
Civil Appeal No.
1758 of 1993 is by Sharadchandra Govindrao Pawar Sharad Pawar to whom a numberice under Section 99 of the R.P. Act was issued, against naming him for companymission of the companyrupt practice under Section 123 4 of the R.P. Act along with the returned candidate Gadakh.
The numberice against Sharadchandra Govindrao Pawar is made absolute under Section 99 of the Representation of People Act and Sharadchandra Govindrao Pawar is named as a person who has been proved to be guilty of companyrupt practices under Section 123 4 of the Representation of People Act.
The petitioner had number purchased any bicycle number handed over any bicycle to anybody.
