RAM SWARUP VERMA Vs. ONKAR NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an election appeal Under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It relates to the mid term election in 1969 to the U.P. Legislative Assembly from Rajpur constituency in the District of Kanpur. The poll took place on February 5, 1969. Five candidates contested the election. The appellant stood as an independent. Ram Dulare Misra, respondent No. 2 in this appeal was the congress nominee. The contest was mainly between the appellant and respondent No. 2. The appellant was declared elected having secured 36997 votes as against 22198 votes secured by Misra. The election of the appellant was challenged by the respondent Onkar Nath, a voter in the constituency on various grounds. The High Court set aside the election of the appellant on the ground that he was guilty of corrupt practices Under Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court held that the appellant was guilty of appealing to the voters to vote for him on the ground of his caste and refrain from voting to Misra on the ground that he was a Brahmin. The other grounds alleged against the election of the appellant were negatived by the High Court. Hence in this appeal we are only concerned with the correctness of the findings of the High Court that the appellant was guilty of corrupt practices Under Section 123(3).

(2.) The appellant was elected to the U.P. Legislative Assembly in the General Election in 1967 on the S.S.P. ticket. He was the Finance Minister in the U.P. Government when the S.V.D. was in power. The allegation of Onkar Nath is that after the fall of the S.V.D. Government the appellant formed an association called "Arjak Sangha". It was a communal organisation The membership of that association was confined to those who are born in the so called lower castes like Kurmi, Yadava, Kori, Chamar, Mallah, Gadaria and Hari-jans. The activities of that Sangha were primarily directed for the consolidation of these castes as against the upper classes in general and Brahmins in particular. It was said that this Sangha under the guidance of the appellant carried on virulent propaganda against the Brahmins before the election, during the election as well as thereafter. According to the allegations contained in the election petition, respondent No. 2 was the brain behind this Sangha and its principal spokesman. It is also alleged that during the election the appellant as well as B.P. Maurya spoke at several election meetings hurling abuses against the Brahmin community, highlighting the exploitation by that community in the past and requesting the voters not to vote to Misra who was a Brahmin but to cast their votes to the appellant who is a Kurmi. In support of this plea several witnesses have been examined on behalf of the first respondent. Evidence was also led to show that the principal objective of Arjak Sangha was to denounce the Brahmins and Brahminism. The Constitution of the Arjak Sangha was placed before the Court to demonstrate the anti-Brahmin objective of Arjak Sangha. Several pamphlets published by Arjak Sangha after the election wherein Brahmins and Brahminism had been assailed were placed before the Court It was said that one of the slogans raised during election was "Brahmin Bania Lalla Inka Munh ker do Kala". Evidence was also led to show that security proceedings had been initiated against some of the supporters of the Arjak Sangha at about the time of the election for preaching hatred against Brahmins and thus creating tension in certain localities Apart from this general evidence adduced to show the anti-Brahmin activities of the appellant and his supporters before the election, at the time of the election and after the election, evidence was also led to show that appeals were made at certain meetings not to cast votes to Misra as he was a Brahmin and that votes should be cast in favour of the appellant on the ground that he belongs to a lower caste.

(3.) The High Court has accepted the evidence referred to hereinbefore. The appellant in his evidence did not hesitate to admit that he is against Brahminism and he wants to finish Brahminism. His antipathy towards Brahminism is writ large in his evidence. The High Court has relied on this circumstance as well as the evidence relating to the activities of Arjak Sangha before and after the election for probabilising the evidence adduced in support of the election petition that the appellant and his supporters particularly B.P. Maurya had appealed to the voters to vote for the appellant on the ground of his caste and not to vote for Misra as he is a Brahmin. The appellant has denied that he had at any time appealed or permitted others to appeal to the voters during the election to vote for him on the ground of his caste and not to vote for Misra as he is a Brahmin. He also examined certain witnesses on his side to support that plea of his but that evidence has not been believed by the trial Court. The High Court has also relied on the initiation of a security proceedings as a circumstance probabilising the evidence that during his election meetings the appellant had com milled the corrupt practice coming within Section 123(4).