Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 102 (1.12 seconds)The Representation of the People Act, 1951
Section 99 in The Representation of the People Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
Section 124 in The Representation of the People Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 153A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Representation Of The People Act, 1950
Section 8A in The Representation of the People Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
Kultar Singh vs Mukhtiar Singh on 17 April, 1964
“30. The High Court had referred to Kultar Singh v. Mukhtiar Singh and said
that a candidate appealing to voters in the name of his religion could be
guilty of a corrupt practice struck by Section 123(3) of the Act if he
accused a rival candidate, though of the same religious denomination, to be
a renegade or a heretic. The appellant had made a direct attack of a
personal character upon the competence of Chagla to represent Muslims
because Chagla was not, according to Bukhari, a Muslim of the kind who
could represent Muslims. Nothing could be a clearer denunciation of a rival
on the ground of religion. In our opinion, the High Court had rightly held
such accusations to be contraventions of Section 123(3) of the Act.”
Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo vs Shri Prabhakar Kashinath Kunte & Others on 11 December, 1995
However despicable be such a statement, it cannot be said to
amount to an appeal for votes on the ground of his religion. Assuming that
the making of such a statement in the speech of the appellant at that
meeting is proved, we cannot hold that it constitutes the corrupt practice
either under sub-section (3) or sub-section (3-A) of Section 123, even
though we would express our disdain at the entertaining of such a thought
or such a stance in a political leader of any shade in the country. The
question is whether the corrupt practice as defined in the Act to permit
negation of the electoral verdict has been made out. To this our answer is
clearly in the negative.”
In Harmohinder Singh Pradhan v. Ranjit Singh Talwandi[76] a Bench of
three learned judges followed the decision in Ramesh Y. Prabhoo (supra)
while construing the provisions of Section 123(3) :