VIRENDRA KUMAR SAKLECHA versus JAGJIWAN AND ORS.

VIRENDRA KUMAR SAKLECHA versus JAGJIWAN AND ORS.

The failure to disclose the source of information in the supporting affidavit, coupled with the non-production of material evidence and the partisan nature of the witnesses, rendered the allegations of corrupt practices unproven. The High Court erred in accepting evidence insufficient to establish corrupt practices under section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Parties
Appellant: Virendra Kumar Saklecha; Respondent No. 1: Jagjiwan; Other Respondents: Respondents Nos. 2 and 3; Respondent No. 4: Respondent No. 4
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 March 1972
Procedural Posture
Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Election Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Setting Aside Election; Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; election petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices Under Representation of the People Act, Affidavits and Proof in Election Petitions, Verification of Pleadings, Appeal From Election Tribunal
Election Law Corrupt Practices Under Representation of the People Act Affidavits and Proof in Election Petitions Verification of Pleadings Appeal From Election Tribunal

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Virendra Kumar Saklecha

Appellant

Jagjiwan

Respondent No. 1

Respondents Nos. 2 and 3

Other Respondents

Respondent No. 4

Respondent No. 4

Procedural Posture

Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Election Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Setting Aside Election; Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was guilty of corrupt practice under sections 123(2), 123(3), and 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
  2. 2 Whether non-disclosure of the source of information in the supporting affidavit vitiated the election petition
  3. 3 Whether the High Court's acceptance of oral evidence without adequate corroboration was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to disclose the source of information in the supporting affidavit, coupled with the non-production of material evidence and the partisan nature of the witnesses, rendered the allegations of corrupt practices unproven. The High Court erred in accepting evidence insufficient to establish corrupt practices under section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; election petition dismissed.

Orders

  • Parties to pay and bear their own costs in the High Court and in the Supreme Court.