AMIR CHAND TOTA RAM Vs. SUCHETA KRIPALANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 133 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, from the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court delivered on the 26th of May, 1959, in F. A. O. No. 100-D of 1958. The subject- matter of this petition originated with an election- petition filed by Shrimati Gurcharan Kaur, Maharani of Nabha, challenging the validity of the election of Shrimati Sucheta Kriplani to the Lok Sabha from New Delhi Parliamentary Constituency. The election was held on 3rd of March, 1957. The election was challenged on the allegations that certain corrupt practices had been committed by the successful candidate, Shrimati Sucheta Kriplani, and her agent. While the election petition was still before the Election Commissioner, Shrimati Gurcharan Kaur was allowed to withdraw, Shri Amir Chand, the present petitioner, was substituted as a petitioner and allowed to prosecute the petition which had been filed by Shrimati Gurcharan Kaur. A portion of the evidence was recorded by Shri Rameshwar Dayal as Election Tribunal and later on the other portion of the evidence was recorded by his successor, Shri Kartar Singh Campbellpuri. In this case the present petitioner wanted to file details of certain alleged corrupt practices but he was not allowed to give the particulars.

(2.) On 25th of August, 1958, the Election Tribunal held that no corrupt practices had been committed by the successful candidate and the election petition was dismissed.

(3.) The present petitioner then filed an appeal to the High Court and on 26th of May, 1959, a Bench of this Court dismissed the appeal, giving rise to the present petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner is desirous of obtaining leave to appeal to the Supreme Court on a number of points enumerated under para 2 of the petition. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 133 (1) (c) is very wide and no attempt has been or perhaps could be made to crystallise the exercise of the High Court's discretion. Certain tests, both of positive and negative nature, have been formulated. Important questions, which are of great public or private importance, arising frequently and concerning a large number of cases on which there is either a conflict of opinion or in which there is no authoritative pronouncement, are considered proper for certifying that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. Negatively, questions involved ought not to be peculiar to a particular case or such on which there is a long catena of uniform view. Questions merely of sufficiency of evidence on issue of facts are outside the ambit of Article 133(1) (c). In the background of the above rule the questions desired to be placed for obtaining guidance from their Lordships may now be examined.