Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the 1967 General Election to the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly from the Reasi Assembly Constituency. The appellant, Bansilal Kohistani, was declared duly elected by a majority of 418 votes after polling on February 21, 1967 and counting on February 27, 1967. The respondent, Rishi Kumar Kaushal, filed Election Petition No. 37 of 1967 on April 8, 1967, challenging the appellant's election on the ground of corrupt practices committed by the appellant, his agents, and others with his consent. The corrupt practice relevant to the appeal concerned the publication of a booklet Ex. P.W. 1/II titled "Open letter from Dehati (Rural) Conference to Mr. Rishi Kumar Kaushal and other Jan Sangh leaders," allegedly containing false statements about the respondent's personal character and conduct. The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir declared the election void solely on the finding that paragraphs 16, 17, and 20 of the booklet constituted corrupt practice under Section 132(4) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, corresponding to Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The High Court had held that allegations in paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 18, and 19 were not proved false and therefore fell outside the provision. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 123 of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957. The appellant argued that the facts in paragraphs 16, 17, and 20 did not relate to the personal character and conduct of the respondent, while the respondent sought and obtained leave to question the adverse findings on paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 18, and 19. The Supreme Court examined the legal principles governing corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the 1951 Act and Section 132(4) of the 1957 Act. It held that a false statement must relate to the personal character of the candidate, not merely his public or political character, and must be reasonably calculated to prejudice the election prospects. The initial onus lies on the election petitioner to establish the circumstances, and once discharged, the burden shifts to the candidate to show his belief in the truth. The Court found that paragraphs 17 and 20 contained no statements of fact relating to personal character or conduct. Regarding paragraph 16, the Court held that it did not allege the respondent was an associate of drunkards, and the averment about extricating himself from a criminal case was proved true, thus falling outside the mischief of Section 132(4). Consequently, the High Court's finding of corrupt practice based on those paragraphs was unsustainable. The Court also held that while a respondent can support the High Court judgment by attacking adverse findings, the findings on paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 18, and 19 were not shown to be erroneous. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment declaring the election void, and dismissed the election petition.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Corrupt Practice - False Statement Relating to Personal Character - Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, Section 132(4); Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 123(4) - To constitute corrupt practice, false statement must be in relation to personal character of candidate, not public or political character; statement must be reasonably calculated to prejudice election prospects. Court explained distinction between private and political character and held that allegations of depravity, immorality, or acts of violence amount to personal character (Paras 156G-157D). B) Election Law - Burden of Proof - Initial Onus on Election Petitioner - Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, Section 132(4); Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 123(4) - Election petitioner bears initial onus to prove circumstances of corrupt practice; once discharged, burden shifts to candidate to show belief in truth of statement. Counter-blast irrelevant if conditions satisfied (Paras 156G-157D). C) Election Law - Corrupt Practice - Personal Character Analysis - Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957, Section 132(4) - Statements in paragraphs 17 and 20 of booklet did not relate to personal character; paragraph 16 did not allege respondent was associate of drunkards; extrication from criminal case proved true; hence no corrupt practice (Paras 164D-F). D) Civil Procedure - Appeal - Respondent Supporting Judgment - Respondent in Supreme Court may attack adverse findings to support judgment; but High Court findings on paragraphs 7,8,10,18,19 not shown erroneous (Paras 165A, 71B).
Issue of Consideration
Whether statements in paragraphs 16, 17, and 20 of booklet Ex.PW1/II amount to corrupt practice under Section 132(4) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957 corresponding to Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951; whether respondent can attack adverse findings on paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 18, 19 to support High Court judgment.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment declaring the appellant's election void, and held that the statements in paragraphs 16, 17, and 20 of the booklet did not constitute corrupt practice under Section 132(4) of the Jammu & Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957. The respondent's attack on the High Court's findings regarding paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 18, and 19 was rejected.
Law Points
- False statement must relate to personal character of candidate to constitute corrupt practice
- Statements about public or political character do not amount to corrupt practice
- Initial onus is on election petitioner to prove false statement and prejudice
- Burden shifts to candidate to show belief in truth once petitioner discharges onus
- Statement must be reasonably calculated to prejudice election prospects
- Counter-blast is irrelevant if conditions of corrupt practice are satisfied
- Allegations of depravity
- immorality
- violence touch personal character
- True statements do not constitute corrupt practice
- Respondent can support judgment by attacking adverse findings
