RAMANBHAI NAGJIBHAI PATEL Vs. JASHVANTSINGH UDESINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under S. 116-A of the Representation of the People Act , 1951 - hereinafter called the Act , by a person who was elected from Mehemadabad Constituency, District Kaira at the general elections held in June, 1975 to the Gujarat Legislative Assembly. The first respondent in this appeal is the election petitioner at whose instance the election of the appellant was set aside by the Gujarat High Court. Respondents 2 to 6 are the unsuccessful candidates at the said election. The appellant was impleaded as respondent No. 1 in the election petition. Respondents 2 to 6 were respondents 2 to 6 in the election petition also. The appellant contested the election as an Independent candidate and out of the unsuccessful candidates, respondent No. 3 was a candidate set up by the Congress Party then known as the Ruling Congress. The election petition to all intents and purposes seems to have been filed at the instance and for the benefit of respondent No.3.

(2.) The polling took place on the 8th of June, 1975. The results were declared on the 12th June, 1975. The appellant was declared elected to the Gujarat Assembly from the Constituency aforesaid. Election Petition No. 7 of 1975 was filed by one Ramabhai Punjabhai. But this election petition was not proceeded with. Respondent No. 1 filed Election Petition No. 8 of 1975 on the 28th of July, 1975. The High Court, by its judgment under appeal, allowed the said election petition and set aside the election of the appellant finding him guilty of having committed a corrupt practice within the meaning of S. 123 (1) (A) (b) of the Act . There were several allegations in the election petition alleging commission of several corrupt practices by the appellant. But all were decided in his favour except the one which will be alluded to hereinafter. On behalf of the first respondent, the judgment of the High Court was also endeavoured to be supported by attacking its finding in regard to the incurring or authorising of expenditure by the appellant in contravention of S. 77 of the Act. The respondent combated the argument of the appellant on the point decided against him (appellant) by the High Court and further submitted that the finding of the High Court in respect of the election expenses was erroneous; the appellant has also committed a corrupt practice within the meaning of S. 123 (6) of the Act by incurring an excess expenditure of Rs. 15/- over the permissible limit. We shall, therefore, deal with these two points only in this appeal.

(3.) The allegation of corrupt practice which has been found against the appellant is contained in para. 9 of the election petition which reads as follows: