DR. RAMESH YESHWANT PRABOO versus SHRI PRABHAKER KASHINATH KUNTE AND ORS.

DR. RAMESH YESHWANT PRABOO versus SHRI PRABHAKER KASHINATH KUNTE AND ORS.

The speeches made by Bal Thackeray during Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo's election campaign constituted appeals to vote based on the candidate's religion and promoted feelings of enmity between communities, amounting to corrupt practices under Section 123(3) (and in the case of the first speech, also Section 123(3A)) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The provisions are not unconstitutional, as the restriction on such appeals is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) for maintaining decency and propriety in a secular democracy.

Parties
Appellant: Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo; Respondent: Shri Prabhaker Kashinath Kunte; Agent: Bal Thackeray
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 December 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices, Religion and Politics, Freedom of Speech, Election Campaign Conduct, Secularism
Election Law Constitutional Law Corrupt Practices Religion and Politics Freedom of Speech Election Campaign Conduct Secularism

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo

Appellant

Shri Prabhaker Kashinath Kunte

Respondent

Bal Thackeray

Agent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether speeches made during the election campaign amounted to corrupt practices under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) are constitutionally invalid and violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution
  3. 3 Whether mere mention of 'Hindutva' or 'Hinduism' constitutes a corrupt practice

Ratio Decidendi

The speeches made by Bal Thackeray during Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo's election campaign constituted appeals to vote based on the candidate's religion and promoted feelings of enmity between communities, amounting to corrupt practices under Section 123(3) (and in the case of the first speech, also Section 123(3A)) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The provisions are not unconstitutional, as the restriction on such appeals is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) for maintaining decency and propriety in a secular democracy.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Both appeals are dismissed.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.