9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the election of Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao. 2. Allegations of corrupt practices under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 3. Declaration of E.V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil as duly elected. 4. Naming of Sharad Pawar under Section 99 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Election of Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao: The election of Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao was challenged on the grounds of corrupt practices under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court declared Gadakh's election void based on allegations that he made false statements about his rival, Vikhe Patil, to prejudice Patil's election prospects. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision declaring Gadakh's election void, specifically focusing on the allegation that Gadakh falsely claimed Vikhe Patil paid Rs. 20 lakhs to the Janata Dal candidate B.G. Kolse Patil to withdraw from the constituency. This statement was found to be a false statement of fact, believed to be false by Gadakh, and reasonably calculated to prejudice Vikhe Patil's election prospects. 2. Allegations of Corrupt Practices under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: The Supreme Court examined various statements attributed to Gadakh and Sharad Pawar. For Gadakh, the Court found that his statements alleging payment of Rs. 20 lakhs to B.G. Kolse Patil constituted corrupt practices under Section 123(4). However, other statements attributed to Gadakh, such as the distribution of bicycles, sarees, and liquor, were found to be speculative and not meeting the requirements of Section 123(4). For Sharad Pawar, the Court found that none of the statements attributed to him constituted corrupt practices under Section 123(4). The statements made by Sharad Pawar were found to be general exhortations and opinions rather than false statements of fact relating to the personal character or conduct of Vikhe Patil. 3. Declaration of E.V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil as Duly Elected: The High Court had declared E.V. alias Balasaheb Vikhe Patil as duly elected after declaring Gadakh's election void. The Supreme Court set aside this declaration, stating that the mere fact that Vikhe Patil secured the next highest number of votes did not justify declaring him elected. The Court emphasized that there was no cogent reason to support the conclusion that but for the votes obtained by Gadakh through corrupt practices, Vikhe Patil would have obtained a majority of valid votes. 4. Naming of Sharad Pawar under Section 99 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: The High Court had named Sharad Pawar for committing corrupt practices under Section 123(4) of the R.P. Act. The Supreme Court set aside this order, finding that the statements attributed to Sharad Pawar did not constitute corrupt practices under Section 123(4). The Court noted that while some statements made by Sharad Pawar were undesirable, they did not meet the legal requirements to be considered corrupt practices. Conclusion: The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision declaring Gadakh's election void due to corrupt practices but set aside the further declaration of Vikhe Patil as duly elected. The Court also set aside the order naming Sharad Pawar for committing corrupt practices under Section 123(4). The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with specific directions on costs and reliefs. Operative Orders: 1. Civil Appeal No. 2115 of 1993 filed by Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao is partly allowed, dismissing the appeal against the declaration of his election as void but allowing the appeal against the declaration of Vikhe Patil as duly elected. Vikhe Patil to receive Rs. 20,000 as costs from Gadakh. 2. Civil Appeal No. 1758 of 1993 filed by Sharad Chandra Govindrao Pawar is allowed, setting aside the order naming him for corrupt practices. No costs. 3. Civil Appeal No. 2116 of 1993 by Deshmukh Bhagwan Rangnath is allowed, setting aside the declaration of Vikhe Patil as duly elected. No costs. 4. Civil Appeal No. 2444 of 1993 by Najan Rambabu Maruti is allowed, setting aside the declaration of Vikhe Patil as duly elected. No costs.
|
