MOHAN SINGH versus BHANW ARLAL & OTHERS.

MOHAN SINGH versus BHANW ARLAL & OTHERS.

There was no allegation of corrupt practice against Himmat Singh that required him to be impleaded as a respondent, and the offer to help in securing employment did not amount to gratification within the meaning of s. 123(1)(B). The publication of the two leaflets constituted a corrupt practice under s. 123(4) as they contained false imputations regarding Bhanwarlal's personal conduct, published with the intention to prejudice his electoral prospects, and established beyond reasonable doubt.

Parties
Appellant: Mohan Singh; Respondent No. 1: Bhanwarlal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 October 1963
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave Against Judgment and Order Dated February 14, 1963 of Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No. 34 of 1962
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices, Publication of False Statements, Representation of the People Act
Election Law Corrupt Practices Publication of False Statements Representation of the People Act

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohan Singh

Appellant

Bhanwarlal

Respondent No. 1

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave Against Judgment and Order Dated February 14, 1963 of Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No. 34 of 1962

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the election petition was liable to be dismissed in limine for non-compliance with s. 82 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether the publication of certain leaflets constituted a corrupt practice under s. 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951

Ratio Decidendi

There was no allegation of corrupt practice against Himmat Singh that required him to be impleaded as a respondent, and the offer to help in securing employment did not amount to gratification within the meaning of s. 123(1)(B). The publication of the two leaflets constituted a corrupt practice under s. 123(4) as they contained false imputations regarding Bhanwarlal's personal conduct, published with the intention to prejudice his electoral prospects, and established beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.