RAMPARTAPCHANDEL Vs. CHAUDHARY LAJJA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by an unsuccessful candidate who then filed an election petition before the High court of Himachal Pradesh. The election was to the 11 Doon Assembly Constituency of the State of Himachal pradesh. The first respondent was the successful candidate. His election was challenged by the appellant on the ground of corrupt practices covered by sections 123 (4 and (8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter called "the Act"). Ss. (4 of Section 123 refers to the publication by a candidate or his agent or by any other person with the consent of the candidate or his election agent of a false statement concerning a candidate which is known to be false. Ss. (8 of Section 123 refers to booth-capturing.

(2.) In the election petition, the appellant averred that the aforesaid corrupt practices had been committed by the first respondent and Harbhajan Singh, his son, who was his election agent; also, by one Amamath Kaushal, who was the counting agent of the first respondent. Both Harbhajan Singh and amamath Kaushal had been candidates at the election but had withdrawn their candidature. They were not impleaded as respondents to the election petition. The High court, basing itself upon the provisions of Section 82 of the Act, came to the conclusion that the election petition was not maintainable and dismissed it.

(3.) Section 82 reads thus: