M J ZAKHARIA SAIT Vs. T M MOHAMMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under S. 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') against the judgment of the High court of Kerala in Election Petition No. 3 of 1987, by which the election of the appellant to the, Kerala Legislative Assembly from Mattancherry Constituency No. 73 was declared void on the ground that the appellant had committed two corrupt practices within the meaning of S. 123 (4 of the Act.

(2.) The admitted facts are that election to the Kerala Legislative Assembly from all the constituencies was held on 23/03/1987. The main contest in almost all the constituencies was between the Uniteddemocratic Front (UDF) consisting of Congress I, Kerala Congress, Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and others on the one hand, and the Left Democratic Front (LDF) consisting of the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) , Revolutionary Socialist Party and others on the other. The appellant was the candidate of the UDF and the first respondent was the candidate of the LDF. In the said election, the appellant was declared elected by a margin of 1873 votes over his nearest rival, the first respondent.

(3.) On 8/05/1987, the first respondent filed an election petition claiming a declaration that the appellants election was void and that he was entitled to be declared duly elected from the said constituency. In support of the petition, the first respondent alleged various corrupt practices on the part of the appellant. However, the High court negatived all the said corrupt practices except two, viz. (i) printing and publication on March 22, 1987, a day prior to the election, pamphlets containing a news item in daily "malayala Manorama" dated 22/05/1983, and (ii) publication of a wall poster, both maligning the personal character and conduct of the first respondent. The High court held that both these acts amounted to corrupt practices within the meaning of S. 123 (4 of the Act and were sufficient to void the election. The pamphlet containing the reprint of the daily "malayala Manorama" was marked as Ex. P-l and two photographs of the wall poster were marked as Exs. P-14 and P-15 before the High court and would be referred to hereinafter as such. Ex. P-14 is the close up and Ex. P-15 is the distant photograph of the same wall poster.