2
बहार गजट (असाधारण), 4 िसत+ बर2013
Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksx
Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksx
Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksx
Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksx
&&&&&&&&&&
&&&&&&&&&&
&&&&&&&&&&
&&&&&&&&&&
vf/kl
vf/kl
vf/kl
vf/klwpuk
puk
puk
puk
fuokZpu lnu] v
fuokZpu lnu] v
fuokZpu lnu] v
fuokZpu lnu] v'kksd jksM] ubZ fnYyh
ksd jksM] ubZ fnYyh
ksd jksM] ubZ fnYyh
ksd jksM] ubZ fnYyh&110001
&110001
&110001
&110001] rkjh[k 26 tqykbZ 2013 @4 Jko.k] 1935 ¼'kd½
] rkjh[k 26 tqykbZ 2013 @4 Jko.k] 1935 ¼'kd½
] rkjh[k 26 tqykbZ 2013 @4 Jko.k] 1935 ¼'kd½
] rkjh[k 26 tqykbZ 2013 @4 Jko.k] 1935 ¼'kd½
la0 82@fcgkj&fo-l-@¼2@2011½@2013 % yksd izfrfuf/kRo vf/kfu;e] 1951 ¼1951 dk 43½ dh /kkjk&106 ds vuqlj.k
esa] fuokZpu vk;ksx ,rn~}kjk fuokZpu vthZ la0 2@2011 esa fn;s x;s mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk ds rkjh[k 4 tqykbZ] 2013 ds vkns’k dks
izdkf’kr djrk gSA
vkns'k ls]
vkj0 ds0 JhokLro]
iz/kku lfpo]
Hkkjr fuokZpu vk;ksxA
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
———————
NOTIFICATION
Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-110001, dated 26th July, 2013/
4 Shravana, 1935 (Saka)
No. 82/BR-LA/(2/2011)/2013: In pursuance of Section 106 of the Representation
of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), the Election Commission hereby published Order
dated the 4th July, 2013 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Election Petition No. 2
of 2011.
By order,
R.K.SRIVASTAVA,
Principal Secretary,
Election Commission of India.
3
बहार गजट (असाधारण), 4 िसत+ बर 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Election Petition No.2 of 2011
=============================================================
Pradeep Singh, son of Sri Satya Narain Singh, resident of village and P.O.
Siswania, P.S. Lauria, District West Champaran at Bettiah.
……. ………Election Petitioner.
Versus
Sri Vinay Bihari, son of Sri Parma Singh,, resident of village
Machhargawan, P.O. & P.S. .logapatti, District West Champaran at Bettiah.
……. ……… Respondent.
Appearance :
For t h e Petitioner
: Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar-Manglam, Adv.
For the Respondent/s
: Mr. Md. Nadim Seraj, Adv.
Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Adv.
=============================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVAN1T1 PRASAD SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 6 0 4 - 0 7 - 2 0 1 3
In this case, when election petitioner's witnesses
were fully examined, to this Court, it appeared that there was
hardly any triable issue.
Mr.
S.B.K.
Mangalam,
learned
counsel
for
the
election petitioner submitted that he had filed this election petition
against the sole-respondent only on a singular ground of corrupt
practice. He submitted that upon evidence it is alleged that the
contesting
sole-respondent
contested
the
election
as
an
independent candidate and won had been consistently making the
statement during the stage of pre-poll canvassing that a vote to
him would be a vote for 'Nitish' and if he is elected, he would go
to
strengthen
the
hands
of
'Nitish'.
This
statement,
he
submits
amounts to corrupt practice within the meaning of Section-123(2)
of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
4
बहार गजट (असाधारण), 4 िसत+ बर2013
Learned
counsel
for
the
respondent
submitted
that
even if this allegation is accepted in entirety, it does not amount to
corrupt
practice.
Both
counsels
agree
that
this
is
the
solitary
ground for seeking cancellation of respondent's election. It may
be
noted
that
the
election
petitioner
was
the
official
JD
(U)
candidate and had lost by more than ten thousand votes in the 5-
Lauria
Assembly
Constituency
in
the
year
2010.
For
proper
appreciation
Section-123(4) of the
Representation of People
Act,
1951 is quoted hereunder:-
"(4) 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, and which he
either .believes to be false or does
not believe to be true, in relation to
the personal character or conduct of
any candidate, or in relation to the
candidature, or withdrawal, of any
candidate, being a statement
reasonably calculated to prejudice
the prospects of that candidate's
election."
If
one
refers
to
the
aforesaid
provision,
what
it
contemplates is that the statement made must be a false statement. A
statement is false statement which maker thereof knows it to be
incorrect
and
deliberately
makes
it.
Here,
in
effect
what
the
5
बहार गजट (असाधारण), 4 िसत+ बर 2013
respondent was saying is that if he elected he would support the
ruling
party
being
an
independent
candidate.
This
is
neither
a
false statement nor a false assurance because it is with regard to a
future conduct.
In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the
statement, as made above, even if accepted in entirety cannot be
said to be a false statement. In view of this finding alone, nothing
is left to be tried. There being no other ground for challenging the
election of the respondent and the challenge on ground of corrupt
practices being unsustainable, the election petition is fit to be dismissed
and is dismissed as such.
(Navaniti Prasad Singh, j.)
—————
अधी-क, सिचवालय मुिणालय,
बहार, पटना ारा ूकािशत एवं मु2ित।
बहार गजट (असाधारण) 689-571+400-ड0ट0पी0।
Website: http://egazette.bih.nic.in
