VARDALLY BUCHI RAMULU Vs. RAMREDDY DAMODHAR REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This election petition is filed under Sections 80, 80A, 81, 100, 101 and 123(6) of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act') seeking a declaration that the election of the first respondent to 283-Thungathurthi Assembly Constituency (for short 'the Constituency') as null and void and further to declare that the petitioner has been duly elected to the Constituency.

(2.) Election to the Constituency was held on 1 -12-1994. The election petitioner contested the election on behalf of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). The first respondent was declared elected from the Constituency as he secured 31,474 votes as against 30,449 votes polled in favour of the petitioner, 2000 votes were declared as invalid. Though there were eleven candidates in the election, the main contest was between the election petitioner and the first respondent only. The first respondent contested the election as an independent candidate. The election petitioner has alleged that the first respondent has adopted unscrupulous methods by deploying number of vehicles from the date of filing of the nomination till the date of declaration of the results of the election, in the constituency. The election petitioner has also alleged that the first respondent has spent huge amount for maintaining fleet of vehicles throughout the constituency during the election campaign and had also maintained number of persons for election campaign. That apart the election petitioner has also alleged that the first respondent has got printed two types of wall posters during the election by spending huge amounts. The election petitioner, therefore, alleges that the returned candidate-first respondent incurred more expenditure than the permissible limit, alluring the voters to exercise their franchise in his favour and such action amounts to corrupt practice with in the meaning of Section 123(6) of the Act. The petitioner had also alleged that though the first respondent had spent more amounts, had failed to show the same in the election expenditure account which action amounts to violation of the provisions contemplated under Section 77 of the Act. The election petitioner has, therefore, alleged that since the first respondent has indulged in corrupt practices and failed to maintain proper account, these actions are contrary to the requirements contemplated under Sections 123(6) and 77 of the Act and, therefore, seeks to declare the election of the first respondent to the Constituency as null and void on these two grounds. He also seeks a consequential direction to declare him as elected candidate for the Constituency.

(3.) The first respondent-returned candidate has filed a detailed written-statement refuting the allegations made against him. The first respondent has categorically stated that an amount of Rs.91,697-60 is the expenditure incurred by him, has been shown in the expenditure statements, which includes the amount of expenditure indicated by the Village Administrative Officer (VAO). The first respondent had also categorically denied of having used number of vehicles as alleged by the election petitioner during the election campaign. He also denied to have incurred more expenditure than the permissible limit of Rs.1.50 lakhs. The first respondent had also denied the allegation of not disclosing the expenditure incurred by him during the election process and pleaded to dismiss the election petition.