Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

21. To bring the alleged statement of fact related to the personal character or conduct of any candidate within the mischief of sub-section (4) of section 123 of the R.P. Act, it has to fulfill three-fold requirement; (i) the statement of fact was false; (ii) the candidate making it either believed it to be false or does not believe it to be true; and (iii) such statement reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of the election of the candidate against whom it is made. Further, an element of mens rea is a necessary ingredient of such alleged corrupt practice because the provision under section 123(4) of the R.P. Act does not accept the doctrine of constructive knowledge. The person challenging the election on the ground of corrupt practice cannot take liberty of making any vague or reckless allegation, without establishing the correctness thereof by leading cogent evidence. But before the Court proceeds to investigate such allegations, the Court must be satisfied, that the material facts have been stated alongwith the full particulars of the corrupt practice, alleged by the petitioner and duly supported by an affidavit under section 83 of the R.P. Act. The Court is also required to assess the quality of evidence led by the parties critically as the standard of proof of such allegation is the same as charge of fraud in a criminal case. The judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sheopal Singh Vs. Ram Pratap, AIR 1965 SC 677 & Subhash Desai (supra) are relied upon.