Case Note & Summary
The case arose from an election petition challenging the election of the appellant to Parliament, alleging corrupt practices. The appellant had signed blank forms for appointing polling agents, which were filled out by others, leading to the appointment of Amar Singh, a member of the armed forces, as his polling agent without the appellant's knowledge of Singh's status. After the election, the respondent filed a petition claiming that the appellant had committed corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Election Tribunal found against the appellant on several issues, declaring his election void. The appellant appealed to the Judicial Commissioner's Court, which upheld the Tribunal's findings on the corrupt practices. The Supreme Court was asked to determine if the appellant was guilty of corrupt practice despite his lack of knowledge regarding Singh's government service. The court held that the appellant had indeed appointed Singh as his polling agent and that this constituted a corrupt practice under Section 123(7) of the Act. The court emphasized that mens rea was not required to establish corrupt practice, as the statutory presumption of assistance for election prospects applied regardless of the appellant's knowledge. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Corrupt Practice - Appointment of Polling Agent - Knowledge of Government Service - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 123(7) - The appellant was held guilty of corrupt practice for appointing Amar Singh as his polling agent, who was a member of the armed forces, despite the appellant's lack of knowledge regarding Amar Singh's status. The court ruled that mens rea was not a necessary ingredient for establishing corrupt practice under the Act, as the statutory presumption of assistance for furthering election prospects applied (Paras 213-222).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant was guilty of corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, for appointing a polling agent who was a member of the armed forces.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was guilty of corrupt practice for appointing Amar Singh as his polling agent, a member of the armed forces, thereby enabling him to act as such. The court ruled that mens rea was not required to establish corrupt practice under the Act.
Law Points
- Corrupt practice
- election law
- mens rea
- appointment of polling agent
- Representation of the People Act
- 1951
