Gupta, J. - (1.) This is an appeal under Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
(2.) The election of the appellant to Lok Sabha from the Manjeri Parliamentary constituency in Kerala was declared void by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam on an election petition presented on May 3, 1977 by the first respondent who was an elector in that constituency on the ground that the returned candidate was guilty of corrupt practice mentioned in sub-section (3A) of Section 123 of the Act. The appellant was a candidate of the Muslim League, the second respondent before us contested the election as a nominee of a dissident group of the Muslim League described as "Muslim League (Opposition)" supported by, as stated in the election petition, "Janata Party and Marxist Party".
(3.) Section 123 (3A) reads: "123. Corrupt practices. - The following shall be deemed to be corrupt practices for the purposes of this Act:- ********** (3A) The promotion of, or attempt to promote, feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens of India on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language, by a candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate." It is said that during the election campaign the appellant made a speech in English at a place called Pullickal within the said constituency and a report of this speech translated into Malayalam appeared in the local daily Chandrika in its issue of March 17, 1977 which, it is alleged, falls within the mischief of Section 123 (3A). The election petition contains several other allegations but as the decision of the High Court is based on this ground only, it is not necessary to refer to them. As already stated, the report of the speech (Ext. P-6) is a translated version in Malayalam of the substance of the speech delivered in English.;