GHASIRAM MAJHI Vs. OMKAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE original application under Section 81 of the Representation of the People act, 1951, (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), was filed on 7-4-1967. An amnedment of the petition was allowed on 7-7-1967. On 16-8-1967 a consolidated petition incorporating the amendment was filed. The facts stated hereunder are with reference to this consolidated petition.

(2.) GHASIRAM Majhi (petitioner) and Omkar Singh (respondent) were the only two candidates who contested the Assembly Seat of the Orissa Legislative Assembly from the Newapara Assembly Constituency during the last general election held in february, 1967. 20-1-67 was the last date for filing nominations 21-1-67 was the date fixed for scrutiny of nominations. 21-2-67 was the date of poll. The results of the election were declared on 22-2-67. The petitioner polled 9829 votes while the respondent polled 10506 votes. The respondent was declared to have returned to the Orissa Legislative Assembly by a margin of 677 votes. The respondent was a candidate from the Congress party while the petitioner was from the Swatantra party. In paragraphs 5 to 7 of the petition, it was averred that the respondent took recourse to various corrupt practices for his success in the election. The respondent carried on large scale bribery to the electors of the constituency and all throughout the length and breadth of the constituency money was freely distributed by the respondent, his election agent and other persons with the consent of the respondent and his election agent with the object of directly or indirectly inducing the electors to vote in favour of the respondent at the election. In paragraphs 7 to 12 of the petition instances and particulars of various corrupt practices were mentioned. The details of the allegations would be referred to at the appropriate places in course of discussion. In paragraph 13 of the petition, an averment was made to the effect that at the aforesaid election the respondent had employed 30 paid canvassers on or after the date of nomination and all such canvassers were provided with a bicycle each hired for the purpose by the respondent to carry on canvassing throughout the entire constituency and that each of the canvassers was paid about Rs. 75. 00 excluding their fooding expenses which was at the rate of Rs. 1. 00 per head per day. The respondent on this account incurred the total expenditure of RS. 3100 00 this amount was deliberately omitted in the accounts of election expenses submitted by the respondent. The expenses shown by the respondent come to Rs. 5041 50 paise and with the addition of Rs. 3100. 00 the total expenditure would be in excess of the prescribed limit. The result of the election, in so far as it concerns the respondent has been materially affected due non-compliance with the provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder. The petitioner would have obtained a majority of the valid votes but for the aforesaid non-compliance and is to be declared to have been duly elected to the Orissa Legislative Assembly. The petitioner accordingly prayed that the election of the respondent should be declared void and that the petitioner should be declared to have been elected.

(3.) THE respondent denied the plaint averments in the written statement. It was expressly stated that he did not resort to any corrupt practice and that there was full compliance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The allegation that the respondent had engaged canvassers on payment of remuneration was denied.