9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Allegation of corrupt practices under Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 2. Standard of proof required for establishing corrupt practices. 3. Specific incidents of undue influence at Bhurkunda polling booth. 4. Evaluation of evidence and witness credibility. 5. Appellant's defense and plea of alibi. Detailed Analysis: 1. Allegation of Corrupt Practices: The appeal was directed against the judgment of the Patna High Court, which set aside the appellant's election on the grounds of indulging in corrupt practices, specifically undue influence, as defined under Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court found that the appellant, through his agents and supporters, threatened, assaulted, and resorted to firing to influence voters. 2. Standard of Proof: The Supreme Court reiterated that a charge of corrupt practice must be proven by convincing evidence, akin to the standard required in criminal cases. The burden is on the party alleging undue influence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. The Court emphasized the need for a cautious approach due to the severe penalties involved, such as disqualification under Section 8A of the Act. 3. Specific Incidents at Bhurkunda Polling Booth: The High Court's findings were based on specific incidents at the Bhurkunda polling booth. Witnesses testified that the appellant's agents and supporters threatened and assaulted voters, and even hurled a bomb to prevent them from voting. These acts were committed in the presence of the appellant, indicating his direct involvement or consent. 4. Evaluation of Evidence and Witness Credibility: The Supreme Court highlighted the principles for evaluating evidence in such cases, including the credibility of witnesses, surrounding circumstances, and the trial court's advantage in observing witness demeanor. The High Court had carefully scrutinized the evidence, finding it complete and conclusive. Independent witnesses corroborated the allegations, and their testimonies were consistent and credible. 5. Appellant's Defense and Plea of Alibi: The appellant's defense was a mere denial of the allegations. He claimed an alibi, stating he was at his village election office and not at the polling booth. However, this plea was not mentioned in his written statement and was deemed an afterthought by the High Court. The Supreme Court found this defense improbable and unnatural, further weakening the appellant's case. Conclusion: The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment, agreeing with its thorough evaluation of evidence and witness testimonies. The appellant's involvement in corrupt practices at the Bhurkunda polling booth was conclusively proven. The appeal was dismissed, and the High Court's decision to set aside the appellant's election was affirmed, maintaining the integrity of the electoral process.
|
