NARASINGH CHARAN MOHANTY versus SURENDRA MOHANTY

NARASINGH CHARAN MOHANTY versus SURENDRA MOHANTY

The evidence did not establish that the respondent had consented to or authorized the impugned editorial or news report, and statements regarding Dwivedi related to public conduct, not personal character. Thus, no corrupt practice was proved under s.123(3) or (4) Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Parties
Appellant: Narasingh Charan Mohanty; Respondent: Surendra Mohanty
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 October 1973
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices, Consent, Character Imputation, Press and Registration of Books Act, Representation of the People Act
Election Law Corrupt Practices Consent Character Imputation Press and Registration of Books Act 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Narasingh Charan Mohanty

Appellant

Surendra Mohanty

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publications and speeches constituted corrupt practices under s.123(3) and s.123(4) Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether publication was with consent of respondent
  3. 3 Whether imputation amounts to attack on personal character or merely public conduct

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish that the respondent had consented to or authorized the impugned editorial or news report, and statements regarding Dwivedi related to public conduct, not personal character. Thus, no corrupt practice was proved under s.123(3) or (4) Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.