Case Note & Summary
The appeal before the Supreme Court arose from an election petition filed by the respondent No.1 challenging the election of the appellant to the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from Nanded Assembly Constituency No.170 in the general election held on February 27, 1990. The appellant, Dr. Das Rao Deshmukh, was the Shiv Sena candidate and had secured the highest votes, defeating the Congress (I) nominee, the election petitioner. The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) in Election Petition No.8 of 1991 declared the appellant's election null and void on the ground of corrupt practice under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, and awarded costs of Rs.10,000 against the appellant. The appellant challenged this judgment in the Supreme Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the subsequent general election for the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly was held in February 1995, making the contest over the 1990 election practically infructuous. However, the Supreme Court decided to hear the appeal on merits because the High Court's finding of corrupt practice had serious consequences for the appellant, including disqualification. The election petition had alleged that the appellant, as a Shiv Sena nominee, conducted his election campaign on the basis of Hindu religion and promoted communal hatred between Hindus and Muslims. Detailed allegations were made regarding speeches by Shiv Sena supremo Balasaheb Thackeray at a public meeting on February 4, 1990, where he appealed for votes on religious grounds, referred to the protection of Hinduism, and criticized Muslim appeasement. The petition also cited audio and video cassettes circulated in the constituency that contained exhortations to vote on religious lines and promote enmity. Posters and pamphlets displayed on the car of the appellant's election agent also called for votes in the name of Hindu religion. The appellant denied these allegations, contending that Shiv Sena was a secular party, that the views expressed by Thackeray in Samna newspaper were personal, and that the propaganda was not with his consent. He argued that only the election manifesto should be considered and that no other Shiv Sena or BJP candidate's election was challenged on similar grounds. The Supreme Court examined the material and, based on the evidence on record, upheld the High Court's finding that the appellant had indulged in corrupt practice under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. The Court held that the speeches and campaign material, which appealed to religion and promoted enmity between communities, were made with the consent of the appellant or his election agent, and therefore the Election Petition was rightly allowed and the election declared void. The appeal was dismissed, and the High Court's judgment was affirmed.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Corrupt Practice - Appeal against High Court judgment declaring election void under Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of Representation of People Act, 1951 - The Supreme Court noted that the appeal challenged the High Court's finding that the appellant indulged in corrupt practice by promoting hatred and enmity between classes and appealing on religious grounds during election campaign - The Court observed that despite the subsequent election making the appeal infructuous, a decision on merits was necessary due to the serious consequences of the corrupt practice finding for the appellant (Paras not mentioned). B) Election Law - Corrupt Practice - Sections 123(3) and 123(3A) of Representation of People Act, 1951 - Allegations of campaign based on Hindu religion and promotion of communal hatred - The election petition alleged that the appellant, a Shiv Sena candidate, carried out campaign on the basis of religion, using speeches, cassettes, and posters to appeal for votes on religious grounds and to promote enmity between Hindus and Muslims - The High Court accepted these allegations and declared the election void (Paras not mentioned). C) Election Law - Consent of Candidate - Attribution of party leader speeches and campaign material to candidate - The appellant denied that the propaganda machinery of Shiv Sena was engaged with his consent and contended that views in Samna newspaper were personal to Balasaheb Thackeray and not attributable to him - The issue of consent and attribution of speeches by party leaders like Balasaheb Thackeray to the candidate was central to the corrupt practice charge (Paras not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant committed corrupt practice under Section 123(3) and Section 123(3A) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 by appealing to religion and promoting enmity between different classes on grounds of religion during the election campaign; whether the High Court correctly attributed the speeches and campaign material of Shiv Sena leaders to the appellant with his consent; and whether the appeal had become infructuous due to the subsequent general election but still required a decision on merits due to serious consequences of the corrupt practice finding.
Law Points
- Corrupt practice under Section 123(3) of Representation of People Act
- 1951
- corrupt practice under Section 123(3A) of Representation of People Act
- election void if corrupt practice committed
- appeal to Supreme Court against High Court judgment in election petition
- necessity of decision on merits despite subsequent election making appeal infructuous
