LAWS(SC)-2001-10-140

SANTOSH YADAV Vs. NARENDER SINGH

Decided On October 30, 2001
SANTOSH YADAV Appellant
V/S
NARENDER SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURSUANT to a notification issued by the Election Commission of India under Section 30 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter 'the Act', for short) in the month of January 2000 several constituencies, including 89 - Ateli Assembly Constituency, in the State of Haryana, were called upon to elect members for the Haryana Legislative Assembly. Several nomination papers were filed on the dates appointed for filing nomination papers. After scrutiny held on 4th February and withdrawal of candidature by a few candidates on 7th February there were 17 candidates, including the appellant and respondent, who remained in the fray for Ateli Constituency. It may be stated thathat Smt. Om Kala, wife of a candidate Shri Naresh Yadav had also filed her nomination. She is alleged to be a cover candidate for her husband. Once the nomination of Shri Naresh Yadav was found to be in order and accepted Smt. Om Kala withdrew her candidature. The constituency went to polls on 25-2-2000. On counting, the contesting candidates were found to have secured the following numbers of votes:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_72_SUPREME8_2001Html1.htm</FRM>

(2.) IN the above table the party affiliation of the candidates is also given.

(3.) THE appellant's case in this regard is that Shri Naresh Yadav was an active worker/leader of INLD and was closely associated and well acquainted with the cadre, workers, supporters and well-wishers of INLD. He was earlier a member of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and had contested 1996 Assembly Election on the BSP ticket. In August 1998, he joined INLD and actively participated in all the programmes, functions and activities of INLD carried by Shri Om Prakash Chautala, president of INLD and Shri Ajay Singh Chautala, president of the youth wing of INLD. THE respondent had extensively toured the constituency accompanying Shri Om Prakash and Shri Ajay Singh. He was an aspirant of INLD ticket for contesting as an official candidate of INLD from Ateli constituency. However, the choice of INLD fell on the appellant, Shri Naresh Yadav, having failed in getting the ticket of INLD, revolted and filed his nomination as an independent candidate. On account of his close association with the INLD cadre he secured a high number of votes cutting into pro - INLD and anti-Congress votes which would have otherwise been polled in favour of the petitioner. Shri Naresh Yadav secured 19855 votes, which is more that 59 times the margin of votes between the votes secured by the respondent and the appellant. If only the nomination paper of Shri Naresh Yadav would have been rejected and his candidature would have been excluded the votes polled by him would have definitely been polled by the appellant. THEre was a pro-INLD wave in the entire State of Haryana in the Assembly Elections of the year 2000. It was in effect an anti-Congress wave. THE respondent could not have secured more votes than what he had secured and in as much as the votes secured by Shri Naresh Yadav were otherwise pro- INLD votes, they would all have been diverted to the appellant. THEse averments have been denied by the respondent in his written statement as already stated. THE learned designated Election Judge has formed an opinion, on appreciation of evidence, that the appellant had failed in substantiating the plea raised in the election petition. Almost similar arguments, as were advanced in the High Court, have been advanced before this Court, of course with added vigour by the learned senior counsel for the appellant. Before we deal with the merits of the submission so made and enter into appreciation of evidence in the light of the submissions made, it will be useful to set out the relevant law.