RAVIKANT S PATIL Vs. SARVABHOUMA S BAGALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, the Act) has been preferred by the elected candidate. The facts are brief and few. The appellant was an elected member of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly which was dissolved in February 2004. By judgment and order dated 28th July 2000, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of seven years by the VI Addl. Sessions Judge, Solapur, in S.C.No.203/1999. Immediately thereafter, Criminal Appeal No.658 of 2000 was preferred by the appellant challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Pending the appeal, the Bombay High Court granted stay of the execution of the sentence.

(2.) THE fresh elections to Karnataka Legislative Assembly were notified. THE election programme notified was as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_578_JT10_2006Html1.htm</FRM> THE appellant moved an application in the pending appeal, for stay of the order of conviction dated 28th July, 2000, so that he can contest the election. THE Bombay High Court, by order dated 26th March, 2004, stayed the conviction pending appeal. THEreafter, the appellant filed his nomination on 29th March 2004. THE respondent raised an objection to the acceptance of appellant's nomination contending that the appellant was disqualified under Section 8(1) and (3) of the Act. THE said objection raised by the respondent was rejected by the Returning Officer. THE appellant was declared elected on 13th May 2004.

(3.) BY the judgment under appeal the High Court relying upon the decision of this Court in K. Prabhakaran v. P. Jayarajan came to the conclusion that the appellant was disqualified to contest the election, in view of the fact that as on the date of nomination, there was a conviction against the appellant which had not been set aside by a higher court. The High Court has opined that the decisive dates are the date of election and the date of scrutiny of nomination and not the date of judgment in an election petition or in appeal against it. Accordingly the election petition was allowed and it was declared that the election and declaration of result of the appellant to the Indian Assembly Constituency were null and void.