1975 (2) TMI 117 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Reliance on legally unproved entries in the Pukar book.
2. Admissibility of the Register under the Evidence Act.
3. Suspicion of fabricated entries in the Pukar Register.
4. Reliance on police challans without best evidence.
5. Reliance on uncorroborated oral testimony.
6. Standard of proof for corrupt practices in elections.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Reliance on Legally Unproved Entries in the Pukar Book
The appellant contended that the High Court erred in relying on unproved entries in the Pukar book, which showed the hiring and payment for trucks used on the election date. The Supreme Court found that the High Court accepted the evidence of Uggar Sain, P.W. 24, based on this Pukar Register without sufficient scrutiny. The High Court did not adequately address the suspicious nature of these entries, nor did it ensure that they were contemporaneous and not fabricated post-election.

Issue 2: Admissibility of the Register under the Evidence Act
The appellant argued that the Pukar Register was inadmissible under the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court disagreed, stating that documents like the Pukar Register could be proved under Section 11 of the Evidence Act, even though the course of business under which the Register was kept was not proved. However, the Court emphasized that the entries in the Register should be rigorously examined to establish their reliability.

Issue 3: Suspicion of Fabricated Entries in the Pukar Register
The appellant raised concerns about the authenticity of the entries in the Pukar Register, suggesting they were not contemporaneous but fabricated. The Supreme Court noted that these suspicions were not adequately addressed by the High Court. The Court observed that the cross-examination of Uggar Sain, P.W. 24, was insufficient to clarify these doubts, and the High Court too readily accepted the entries without a thorough examination.

Issue 4: Reliance on Police Challans Without Best Evidence
The appellant contended that the High Court erred in relying on police challans of truck drivers without the best evidence from the police. The Supreme Court found that the date of the challans was not seriously disputed before the High Court, and conflicting evidence regarding the date was not adequately addressed. The Court suggested that the High Court should re-examine this issue, considering all relevant evidence, including summoning the original record from the Magistrate's Court.

Issue 5: Reliance on Uncorroborated Oral Testimony
The appellant argued that the High Court relied on uncorroborated oral testimony of truck drivers. The Supreme Court clarified that there is no inflexible rule requiring corroboration of oral testimony in election cases. However, the Court emphasized that oral evidence should be scrutinized carefully, especially in cases involving serious charges like corrupt practices. The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not scrutinize the oral evidence rigorously enough.

Issue 6: Standard of Proof for Corrupt Practices in Elections
The appellant asserted that the High Court overlooked the principle that charges of corrupt practices in elections must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court agreed, stating that the High Court adopted a standard of proof that was not strict enough. The Court reiterated that charges of corrupt practices are quasi-criminal in nature and require strict proof. The High Court's judgment lacked a rigorous examination of the evidence and did not apply the appropriate standard of proof.

Conclusion
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remanded the case for reconsideration. The High Court was directed to re-examine the evidence, particularly the Pukar Register and the police challans, and to apply the stricter standard of proof required for charges of corrupt practices. The appellant was allowed to continue functioning as an elected member subject to the result of the election petition. The costs of the litigation were to abide by the result.