Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laddu Ram Kori vs Jajpal Singh Jajii on 4 April, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
EP-8-2019
Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others
Gwalior, Dated : 04.04.2022
Shri R.D. Jain, Senior Counsel with Shri Sangam Kumar Jain,
Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri V.K. Bhardwaj, Senior Counsel with Shri S.S. Gautam and
Shri Rohit Batham, Counsel for the respondent No. 1.
Heard on I.A. No.1185/2022. This is an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC.
It is submitted by the counsel for the election petitioner that he does not wish to file reply and he is ready to argue the matter on I.A. No.1185/2022.
It is submitted by the counsel for the respondent No. 1 that by this election petition, the election petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No. 1 in the State Assembly elections which were held in the month of December, 2018 and he was declared as return candidate on 13.12.2018. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 tendered his resignation and the same was accepted by the competent authority vide notification dated 19.03.2020 and the seat of Ashoknagar constituency No. 32 (SC) fell vacant and, accordingly, fresh by-elections were held in the month of October-November, 2020. Respondent No. 1 again contested the election from reserved constituency (SC), Ashoknagar as an authorized candidate of BJP. Respondent No. 1 was again declared elected. Election petitioner did 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others not participate in the by-election. Now since the by-election has already taken place in the month of November, 2020 and the respondent No. 1 has been declared elected, therefore, the present election petition has rendered redundant and thus, the present election petition should not proceed further for want of cause of action in the interest of justice and it is submitted that the election petition has stood abated. Counsel for the respondent No. 1 has relied upon the order passed by the Madras High Court in the case of V. Anbazhagan Vs. A. Laser and others by order dated 27.04.2016 passed in ELP No.7/2011 as well as in the case of Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju Vs. Nimmaka Jaya Raju and others reported in and (2006) 1 SCC 212.
Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the election petitioner. It is submitted that the basic ground for challenge of the election of the respondent No. 1 is that he does not belong to scheduled caste. If the said ground is answered in favour of the election petitioner, then it would amount to corrupt practice as defined under Section 123(4) of Representation of People Act, 1951. Counsel for the election petitioner has relied upon Sheo Sadan Singh Vs. Mohan Lal Gautam reported in 1969 (1) SCC
408. 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others Heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the case of V. Anbazhagan (supra), argument which was raised in paragraph 45 of the judgment by the election petitioner before the Court was that if the respondent is disqualified and the election is held void, then he could not contest the election as return candidate, therefore, the petition has not been considered to have become infructuous.
In Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju (supra), the Supreme Court in paragraph 8 has held as under:-
"8. .............This Court in C.M. Arumugam v. S. Rajgopal [(1976) 1 SCC 863] has held that every election furnishes a fresh cause of action for a challenge to that election and an adjudication in a prior election petition cannot be conclusive in the subsequent proceeding........."
Corrupt practice has been defined under Section 123 and Section 123(4) of Representation of People Act, 1951, reads as under:-
"123 Corrupt practices.-- The following shall be deemed to be corrupt practices for the purposes of this Act:--
(1) xxx xxx xxx (2) xxx xxx xxx (3) xxx xxx xxx (4) The publication by a candidate or his agent or by any other person 9[with the consent of a candidate or his election agent], of any statement of fact which is false, and which he either believes to be false or does not believe to be true, in relation to the personal character or conduct of any candidate or in 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others relation to the candidature, or withdrawal,10[***] of any candidate, being a statement reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of that candidate's election."
It is submitted by the counsel for the election petitioner that false declaration that the respondent No. 1 belongs to a particular caste with a solitary intention to contest the election in the reserved category would amount to corrupt practice and as per Section 8A of the Representation of People Act, 1951, the returned candidate would suffer disqualification.
Counsel for the Election Petitioner also relied upon the judgment passed in the case of V. Anbazhagan (supra), which reads as under:-
"65. The decision in Krishnamoorthy vs. Sivakumar and eight others (2009-3-L.W.495) is relating to the challenge made by the election petitioner therein to the Panchayat election on the ground that the elected person had filed a false declaration suppressing the details of the criminal cases pending trial against him and that his nomination, therefore, ought to have been rejected by the returning officer.
66. In this case, the learned Single Judge of this Court has observed as under:-
Petitioner admittedly did not furnish full and complete information relating to his implication in criminal cases - In this case, mentioning of just one crime number, without mentioning the details of 8 charge sheets filed against him and cognizance taken by the Magistrate, cannot be taken to be a fair disclosure of full and complete information as required by the notification of the Election Commission Failure of the petitioner to furnish the 5 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others details had the potential to interfere with the freedom of choice of the voters It is nothing but an attempt to interfere with the free exercise of electoral right which would fall within the meaning of undue influence and consequently a corrupt practice under Section 259 (1)(b) read with Section 260(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.
67. If the false, incorrect or incomplete information was capable of influencing the freedom of choice of the voters, then it will fall under the category of undue influence within the meaning of Section 260(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 read with Section 123(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. District Judge was right in ultimately setting aside the election, though the ground on which he set it aside, may not be correct."
Thus, if the election of the respondent No. 1 which was held in the year 2018 is set aside on the ground that he has contested the election against a reserved category by making false declaration with regard to his caste, then he would suffer disqualification for a maximum period of 6 years from the date when the order under Section 99 of the Representation of People of Act, 1951 would take its effect, therefore, this election petition has not become infructuous and it would not abate.
The Supreme Court in the case of Sheo Sadan Singh (Supra) has held as under:-
"5. We are unable to accept the contention of Mr Veda Vyasa, learned Counsel for the respondent, that the petition must be held to have become infructuous in view of the dissolution of the Assembly. In this proceeding we are considering the validity of the election of the respondent and not whether he is 6 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others continuing as a member. If the contention of the appellant that the respondent was guilty of corrupt practices during the election is found to be true then not only his election will be declared void, he is also liable to incur certain electoral disqualifications. The purity of elections is of utmost importance in a democratic set up. No one can be allowed to corrupt the course of an election and get away with it either by resigning his membership or because of the fortuitous circumstance of the Assembly having been dissolved. The public are interested in seeing that those who had corrupted the course of an election are dealt with in accordance with law. That purpose will stand defeated if we accept the contention of Mr Veda Vyasa.
10. The law relating to withdrawal and abatement of election petitions is exhaustively dealt with in Chapter IV of Part VI of the Act. In deciding whether a petition has abated or not we cannot travel outside the provisions contained in that chapter. There is no provision providing for the dropping of an election petition for any reason other than those mentioned therein. The Act does not provide for the abatement of an election petition either when the returned candidate whose election is challenged resigns or when the Assembly is dissolved. As the law relating to abatements and withdrawal is exhaustively dealt with in the Act itself, no reliance can be placed on the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code nor did the learned counsel for the respondent bring to our notice any provision in the Civil Procedure Code under which the election petition can be held to have abated."
Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that in case of corrupt practice, election petition would not render infructuous or abated on account of resignation from the constituency or the dissolution of the assembly.
Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered 7 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH EP-8-2019 Laddu Ram Kori Vs. Jajpal Singh Jajii and others opinion that merely because the respondent No. 1 had resigned and has re-contested the by-election, it would not make the election petition infructuous or abated.
Accordingly, I.A. No.1185/2022 is dismissed. List this case on 11.04.2022 for submission of list of witnesses.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Abhi ABHISHEK CHATURVEDI 2022.04.05 16:50:09 +05'30'