ZIYAUDDIN BURHANUDDIN BUKHARI versus BRIJMOHAN RAMDASS MEHRA & ORS.

ZIYAUDDIN BURHANUDDIN BUKHARI versus BRIJMOHAN RAMDASS MEHRA & ORS.

Speeches by the appellant amounted to corrupt practices as defined by Section 123(2), (3), and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act, engaging the electorate on prohibited grounds of religion for electoral advantage. Tape-recorded evidence is admissible with proper safeguards. Defects alleged in petition/affidavit were unsubstantial and did not warrant reversal of High Court's findings. High Court order on costs was modified to avoid excessiveness and ensure only the petitioner receives costs.

Parties
Appellant: Ziy Auddin Burhanuddin Bukhari; Respondent: Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra; Respondent: Shaukat Currimbhoy Chagla
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 April 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Setting Aside Election
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices, Secularism in Electoral Process, Admissibility of Evidence, Costs in Election Petition
Election Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Corrupt Practices Secularism in Electoral Process Admissibility of Evidence Costs in Election Petition

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ziy Auddin Burhanuddin Bukhari

Appellant

Brijmohan Ramdass Mehra

Respondent

Shaukat Currimbhoy Chagla

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Setting Aside Election

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether speeches made by the appellant constitute corrupt practices under Section 123(2), (3) and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act
  2. 2 Whether tape-recorded evidence of speeches is admissible
  3. 3 Whether the election petition and supporting affidavit met statutory requirements

Ratio Decidendi

Speeches by the appellant amounted to corrupt practices as defined by Section 123(2), (3), and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act, engaging the electorate on prohibited grounds of religion for electoral advantage. Tape-recorded evidence is admissible with proper safeguards. Defects alleged in petition/affidavit were unsubstantial and did not warrant reversal of High Court's findings. High Court order on costs was modified to avoid excessiveness and ensure only the petitioner receives costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant found guilty of corrupt practices under Section 123(2), (3), and (3A) of the Representation of the People Act
  • High Court order setting aside election affirmed