RAMJI PRASAD SINGH versus RAM BILAS JHA & FOUR ORS.

RAMJI PRASAD SINGH versus RAM BILAS JHA & FOUR ORS.

Section 23(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 is mandatory; amendments to the electoral roll after the last nomination date are without jurisdiction and do not confer the right to vote. The 40 new members, although their names appeared, were not entitled to vote as the amendments were made contrary to law. The charge of bribery was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and is not accepted.

Parties
Appellant: Ramji Prasad Singh; Respondent No. 1: Ram Bilas Jha; Respondent No. 5: Respondent No. 5 (Mahanth Raghunath Das)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 September 1976
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Patna High Court Judgment in Election Petition No. 42 of 1972
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Preparation and Revision of Electoral Rolls, Electoral Roll Entries and Right to Vote, Section 23(3) Mandatory Nature, Bribery in Elections, Amendment of Entries After Nomination Date
Election Law Preparation and Revision of Electoral Rolls Electoral Roll Entries and Right to Vote Section 23(3) Mandatory Nature Bribery in Elections Amendment of Entries After Nomination Date

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramji Prasad Singh

Appellant

Ram Bilas Jha

Respondent No. 1

Respondent No. 5 (Mahanth Raghunath Das)

Respondent No. 5

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Patna High Court Judgment in Election Petition No. 42 of 1972

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 40 newly nominated members were illegally prevented from voting, materially affecting the election result
  2. 2 Whether entries in the electoral roll after the last nomination date are conclusive of right to vote, even if made contrary to law
  3. 3 Whether allegation of bribery by respondent no. 1 has been proved

Ratio Decidendi

Section 23(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 is mandatory; amendments to the electoral roll after the last nomination date are without jurisdiction and do not confer the right to vote. The 40 new members, although their names appeared, were not entitled to vote as the amendments were made contrary to law. The charge of bribery was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and is not accepted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs in favour of respondent no. 1.