JITENDRA BAHADUR SINGH versus KRISHNA BEHARI & ORS.

JITENDRA BAHADUR SINGH versus KRISHNA BEHARI & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in allowing the inspection of ballot papers solely on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations and figures in the petition and affidavit. There was no adequate statement of material facts nor supporting evidence; therefore, the order allowing scrutiny of ballot papers was not justified.

Parties
Appellant: Jitendra Bahadur Singh; Respondent: Krishna Behari; Respondent: Nevatia Rameshwar Prasad
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 August 1969
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From an Order of the Allahabad High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Scrutiny of Ballot Papers, Material Facts in Election Petitions, Secrecy of Ballot Papers
Election Law Scrutiny of Ballot Papers Material Facts in Election Petitions Secrecy of Ballot Papers

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 1 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jitendra Bahadur Singh

Appellant

Krishna Behari

Respondent

Nevatia Rameshwar Prasad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From an Order of the Allahabad High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether scrutiny of ballot papers can be ordered without an adequate statement of material facts and supporting evidence in the election petition

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in allowing the inspection of ballot papers solely on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations and figures in the petition and affidavit. There was no adequate statement of material facts nor supporting evidence; therefore, the order allowing scrutiny of ballot papers was not justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The order permitting scrutiny of ballot papers is set aside.
  • The trial court is directed to proceed with the trial in accordance with law.