HARCHARAN SINGH Vs. S MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by :

(2.) AT the general elections held in February 1967 the appellant polled the largest number of votes and was declared elected to the Punjab Vidhan Sabha from the Zira Constituency. The first respondent S. Mohinder Singh, who was a candidate at the election, applied to the High court of Punjab for setting aside the election of the appellant on the ground that the nomination of the appellant who was not a voter in the Zira Constituency was improperly accepted by the Returning Officer, for the appellant had failed to file before the scrutiny a copy of the electoral roll or the relevant part thereof or a certified copy of the relevant entries of the poll pertaining to the constituency to which he belonged, and that the result of the election to the Zira Constituency insofar as it concerned the appellant was materially affected by improper acceptance of his nomination. The High court upheld the contention and set aside the election of the appellant and declared the election of the appellant void under s. 100(1)(d)(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Against that order the appellant has appealed to this court.

(3.) THIS court in Sri Baru Ram v. Shrimati Prasanni & Ors.(1) observed at p. 141 8 : `Sub-section (5) of s. 33 deals with the stage of the scrutiny of the nomination papers and it provides that where a candidate is an elector of a different constituency, a copy of the electoral roll of that constituency or the relevant part thereof or a certified copy of the relevant entry of such roll shall, unless it is filed along with the nomination paper, be produced before the returning officer at the time of the scrutiny. It is thus clear that when the stage of scrutiny is reached the returning officer has to be satisfied that the candidate is an elector of a different constituency and for that purpose the statute has provided the made of proof. Section 36, sub-s. (7) lays down that the certified copies which are required to. be produced under s. 33 (5) shall be conclusive evidence of the fact that the person referred to. in the relevant entry is an elector of that constituency. In other words, the scheme of the Act appears to be that where a candidate is an elector of a different constituency he has to prove that fact in the manner prescribed and the production of the prescribed copy has to be taken as conclusive evidence of the said fact.`