Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)The Bihar Municipal Act, 2007
Krishnamoorthy vs Sivakumar & Ors on 21 January, 2015
In a democracy, purity and probity has to be
maintained in public life and in this regard, the Court is in agreement
with the submissions of learned counsel for the State Election
Commission and his reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Krishnamoorthy (supra). The Act, especially
Sections 445(1) and 445(1) (i) thereof, stipulate that a candidate shall,
apart from any information which he is required to furnish in his
nomination papers delivered under the Act or the Rules made
thereunder, has also to furnish information on affidavit on various
aspects including whether he is convicted/ acquitted/ discharged of
any criminal offence in the past and if any, whether he is punished
with imprisonment or fine. Thus, even if no such specific column
exists in the format of the nomination papers, in law, in terms of the
aforesaid specific provision of the Act, the petitioner was obliged to
disclose the pendency of criminal cases against him and as has been
submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner himself that non filing
Patna High Court CWJC No.7071 of 2017 dt.19-05-2017
8/10
of the chargesheet amounts to discharge by the police itself, as per
the language of the said provision of the Act, it is discharge from any
criminal offence and not restricted to discharge by the Court. Thus,
even if no chargesheet has been submitted or the petitioner not sent up
for trial, he was required in law to disclose such information on
affidavit. At the cost of repetition, this Court indicates that such
suppression of criminal antecedent is detrimental to a democratic set
up where the electorate has the right to know about the antecedent
reflecting the character of the prospective candidate of which
pendency of criminal cases is a major indicator. Further, in the
affidavit regarding his name not being present in any other voter list
of any other Nagar Nigam/Nagar Parishad/Nagar Panchayat/ Gram
Panchayat, the petitioner having written 'shunya' (zero), which is a
categorical statement that his name was not at any other place, and
this fact being patently false and even admitted in the reply filed by
the petitioner himself before the State Election Commission, where he
has only stated that he would not make use of the entry of his name in
the other Gram Panchayat, cannot absolve him of the consequences of
such wrong statement. Further, in view of the admitted position that
the petitioner had contested the election for the said Gram Panchayat
also in the year 2016, it cannot be said that he had no knowledge of
such entry. Thus, the Court has no hesitation to hold that such false
Patna High Court CWJC No.7071 of 2017 dt.19-05-2017
9/10
statement of writing 'shunya' (zero) with regard to a fact which was
well known to the petitioner is a deliberate false statement and further
non disclosure of pendency of more than one criminal cases under
serious Sections of various penal laws, is an equally adverse
circumstance against the petitioner since such non disclosure would
lead to the electorate being unaware of the past conduct and criminal
antecedent of the petitioner, which is a vital and essential information
and the electorate has a right to know about it. Moreover, once the
Court finds that such suppression would be a valid ground for
interfering in the election, if the petitioner finally wins, it would not
let matters wait till such time, only as mere formality, when the result
is already known. Thus, once the petitioner's conduct makes his
nomination paper liable to be rejected, this Court would not provide
him the luxury to contest the election on a technicality, as it would be
a mockery of the system.
Shiv Ballam Yadav vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 February, 2016
Further, the Court would also rely upon and
adopt the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 18.11.2016 in
C.W.J.C. No. 2394 of 2016 in the case of Shiv Ballam Yadav vs.
The State of Bihar & Ors.
Smt. Ruma Raj vs The State Election Commission Bihar & ... on 18 May, 2017
In this connection, learned counsel submitted that he was
adopting the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner of
C.W.J.C. No. 7203 of 2017 (Smt. Ruma Raj vs. The State Election
Commission Bihar & Ors.) and noted by the Court in its order
passed earlier today. With regard to the facts of the case, he submitted
that as far as the allegation of not disclosing the details of three
criminal cases filed against him, he had stated before the State
Election Commission in his written reply that as per his knowledge,
in two cases, neither any chargesheet has been submitted against him
Patna High Court CWJC No.7071 of 2017 dt.19-05-2017
5/10
nor cognizance taken by the Court and further with regard to the third
case, the records were not available and thus, in terms of the
requirement of disclosing such fact as per the columns in the affidavit
details of such cases were not required to be disclosed. As far as the
allegation of non disclosure of his name finding place at Serial No.
131 of the voter list of Gram Panchayat Raj Jamsari, it was stated that
he would not take benefit of such entry. It was submitted that the
petitioner had in fact left the column vacant but at the insistence of
the Returning Officer, wrote 'shunya' (zero). Learned counsel
submitted that the police not submitting chargesheet against the
petitioner in the criminal cases clearly indicates that the petitioner
was not sent up for trial which amounts to him being discharged by
the police itself.
1