TRILOKINATH Vs. VINOD KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by order dated 29-3-2003 in Election Petition No. 15/2000 passed by Ist A. D. J. , Sagar, whereby the election of the petitioner to the post of Speaker was set-aside instead the respondent was declared duly elected, the petitioner - a non-applicant has preferred this revision under Section 441-F of M. P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956.

(2.) THE facts in brief arc, petitioner Trilokinath and respondent Vinod Kumar were elected as Councillor of Municipal Corporation, Sagar. Including the Mayor total 49 persons were eligible to vote in the election to the post of Speaker. Petitioner-Trilokinath and respondent Vinod Kumar alone were the candidates for the election conducted by Returning Officer/ Collector, Sagar on 124-2000. On opening of ballot box 49 ballot papers in total were found, however, 5 ballot papers were tagged with Rs. 5/- currency note. Removing 5 currency notes, those 5 ballot papers were also counted in favour of petitioner-Trilokinath. It was objected upon by the respondent Vinod Kumar, making a statement to declare him elected as he obtained 24 votes as against 20 votes of Trilokinath. The Returning Officer/collector, Sagar did not paid heed to the request and declared petitioner-Trilokinath as elected by one vote. Therefore, under Section 441 of the M. P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, respondent Vinod Kumar preferred Election Petition No. 15/2000. It was contended that by use of corrupt practice petitioner Trilokinath influenced 5 voters and to seek their identity asked them to enclose Rs. 5/- currency note in the ballot paper. The 5 ballot papers containing Rs. 5/- currency note ought to have been treated as invalid. The respondent Vinod Kumar should have been declared elected. The petition was resisted by the petitioner/non-applicant Trilokinath on the ground that Rs. 5/- currency notes were not found with any ballot paper. Petitioner Trilokinath secured 25 votes as against respondent who had secured 24 votes. Therefore, he was rightly declared as returned. Allegation of 5 ballot papers enclosed with Rs. 5/-currency note were bald, frivolous and after thought. Immediately after the counting, no allegation was made regarding the ballot papers having enclosed with Rs. 5/- currency notes. The A. D. J. , Sagar, vide order dated 29-3-2003 held that 5 ballot papers were found/enclosed with Rs. 5/- currency note. Therefore, these votes in favour of petitioner Trilokinath ought to have been treated by the Returning Officer as invalid. Accordingly, the petition under Section 441-F was allowed and respondent Vinod Kumar was declared as elected. Petitioner assails the order aforesaid on the ground that the allegations were frivolous and after thought and should not have been accepted in the evidence.

(3.) IN election petition Para 7 it was stated that petitioner/non-applicant adopted corrupt practice by asking the voters, to enclose Rs. 5/-currency note at the time of casting vote in his favour so as to be identified subsequently. Further allegations of corrupt practice were not pleaded. On the basis of the evidence of alleged Rs. 5/- currency note not being found enclosed with 5 ballot papers, the Court below recorded a finding that the petitioner/non-applicant adopted corrupt practice. The allegation of corrupt practice must be clear and specific and should not be left for Court to infer by adopting process of involved reasoning. A charge of corrupt practice is substantially akin to a criminal charge. The commission of a corrupt practice entails serious penal consequences. It vitiates election of the candidate concerned. Pleadings to the instances of corrupt practice must therefore be adequately pleaded. The standard of proof must be strict, has been laid down in the judgment reported in AIR 1975 SC 667. Learned Counsel for the respondent/ applicant during the course of argument rightly conceded that in the absence of adequate pleadings of corrupt practice in election petition, the question of corrupt practice being adopted could not have been gone into and the respondent/applicant as such has failed to substantiate the allegations of corrupt practice. With this the only question that remains for determination is, whether at the time of counting of votes 5 ballot papers were found carrying Rs. 5/- currency notes enclosed with them.