JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The appellant herein, who contested the
parliamentary elections held on 16
th
April, 2009 for
the No.05 Kozhikode Constituency of the Lok
Sabha, challenged the election of the Respondent,
Shri M.K. Raghavan, who was the returned candidate
from the said constituency, by way of an Election
Petition filed under Section 81 read with Sections
100, 101 and 123 of the Representation of the
People Act, 1951, hereinafter referred to as the
"1951 Act". The Appellant contested the election
as the official candidate of the Communist Party of
India (Marxist), hereinafter referred to as the
"CPI(M)" led by the Left Democratic Front,
hereinafter referred to as the "LDF", whereas the
Respondent No.1 was a candidate of the Indian
National Congress and he contested the election as
the candidate of the United Democratic Front,
hereinafter referred to as the "UDF".
(2.) The ground on which the election of the
Respondent No.1 was challenged was that he had
published false statements with regard to the
Appellant and thereby committed corrupt practice
within the meaning of Section 123(4) of the 1951
Act, which provides that the publication by a
candidate or his agent or by any other person with
the consent of a candidate or his election agent,
of any statement of fact which is false in relation
to the personal character, conduct of any
candidate, shall be deemed to be guilty of corrupt
practice within the meaning of Section 123 of the
1951 Act. The details of the publications have
been set out in paragraph 4 of the impugned
judgment and are as follows :
""A. "Corrupt practice" by the publication
of allegedly false statements in the form
of
1) Annexure A ("Jagratha" ("Be careful")
Newsletter bearing no date) allegedly
published on 14-4-2009 and distributed
on 15-4-2009
2) Annexure H (Anonymous notice allegedly
published on 14-4-2009 and 15-4-2009
3) Annexure K (Report in the Mathrubhumi
daily dated 31-3-2009 of the speech of
M.P. Veerendra Kumar
4) Annexure L Hand Bill dated 11-4-2009
allegedly distributed on 14-4-2009
5) Annexure M Wall poster allegedly
published on 14-4-2009 & 15-4-2009
6) Annexure N Wall poster -do- -do-
AND
B. Fielding of other candidates having
similarity in names."
(3.) The highlights of the six publications have
also been shown in a tabular chart in paragraph 5
of the impugned judgment and speak for themselves.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.