KARUNAKAR DAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners call in question the Explanations & added to Section 77, Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, 'the Act'), by the Representation of the People (Amendment) Act, 1974 (Act 58 of 1974), to be described hereinafter as the Amendment Act, which came into force on and from October 19, 1974, as being illegal and invalid, by defeating the very purpose of the Act providing for a free and fair election and being opposed to the invaluable doctrines of equality before the law and equal protection of the laws enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution and for having encouraged corrupt practices and eroding all norms embodied in the Act.

(2.) Section 77 of the Act, as it stood prior to the addition of the Explanations by the Amendment Act, would read:

(3.) Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Das has contended that the Explanation 1 to Section 77 of the Act is in conflict with and has enlarged the scope and purport of Section 77 of the Act and is invalid owing to the grounds referred to above. Mr. Das has invited our attention to extracts from Parker's Conduct of Parliamentary Elections and Erskine May's Parliamentary Practice besides the laws relating to elections in the United States of America to bring home his point that elections must be free and fair which would be apparent from the stringent laws and conventions of those countries relating to elections. With regard to violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, Mr. Das has placed reliance on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in AIR 1953 SC 215 Ram Prasad Narayan Sam v. The State of Bihar. He has relied on the observations made by Hon'ble P.N. Bhagwati, J. in AIR 1975 SC 308 Kanwar Lal Gupta v. Amarnath Chawla. Reliance has also been placed on the principles laid down in some other decisions of the Supreme Court with regard to the intention of the Parliament in embodying the doctrine of equality before the law in Article 14 of the Constitution.