1984 (4) TMI 279 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether or not the corrupt practice alleged has been proved against appellant? Held that - After a careful consideration of the documents, the circumstances of the case and the oral evidence of the witnesses placed before us. We find ourselves in agreement with the judgment of the High Court. Indeed, it is very difficult to prove a charge of corrupt practice merely on the basis of oral evidence because in election cases, it is very easy to get the help of interested witnesses but very difficult to prove charges of corrupt practice. In the instant case, the evidence-both oral and documentary-led by the appellant falls short of the standard of proof required to bring his case within the four corners of s. 123 (4) of the Act. Thus the judgment of the High Court is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to election results based on corrupt practices under s. 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the election of respondent No. 1 based on allegations of corrupt practices, specifically focusing on s. 123(4) of the Act. The allegations included speeches made by the respondent and his associates portraying the appellant as a murderer of Asa Ram, aiming to influence the votes of specific groups. The appellant argued that these acts materially affected the election outcome.

The judgment emphasized the strict standard of proof required to establish corrupt practices, akin to criminal charges. The court examined the evidence presented by the appellant, including witness statements and news items. However, the court found inconsistencies and lack of corroboration in the evidence provided by the appellant's witnesses, leading to doubts about the veracity of the allegations.

Regarding the speeches and news items cited by the appellant, the court highlighted the need for concrete evidence to substantiate the claims of corrupt practices. The court scrutinized the content of the speeches and news reports, ultimately concluding that they did not establish a direct connection between the allegations and the corrupt practices under s. 123(4) of the Act.

The judgment underscored the importance of reliable and substantial evidence in proving allegations of corrupt practices in elections. Despite the appellant's efforts in presenting the case, the court found the evidence insufficient to meet the stringent standard required for proving corrupt practices. Therefore, the High Court's decision to dismiss the election petition was affirmed, and the appeal was subsequently dismissed without any order as to costs.