Appeal No 1125 of 1970
Appeal under section 116 A of the Representation of the People Act 1951 from the Judgment and order dated March 1970 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Election Petition No 2 of 1969
section V Gupte section K Ghose Advocate General Nagaland Naunit Lal A R Barthakar R C Chowdhury and B K Dass for the appellant
660 DP Singh A K Gupta V J Francis and section P Singh for A the respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ray J
This is an appeal from the judgment dated 26 March 1970 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court declaring the election of the appellant void under section 1 00  1  b of the Representation of the People Act hereinafter referred to as the Act and further declaring the appellant to have committed a corrupt practice within the meaning of section 1236 of the Act for incurring or authorising expenditure in contravention of section 77 of the Act
The gist of the finding of the High Court is that the appellant showed in his return a sum of Rs 900 as election expenses after claiming a refund of Rs 100 but the appellant is found to have  incurred or authorised expenditure of a further amount of Rs 15415 which the appellant did not include in his return and thereby the appellant exceeded the permissible limit of Rs 1000by Rs 5415
The finding of the High Court is that the appellant incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rs 90 for what is described as pink identity cards and secondly incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rs 2265 in respect of purchase of forms and election handbooks andthirdly incurred or authorised the expenditure of Rs 4250 on 18 trunk calls between 15 January 1969 and 11 February 1969 aggregating Rs 15415 which sum was not included in the return of election expenses
The appellant was at the time of the election Chief Minister of the State of Nagaland
The appellant and the respondent were two candidates at the General Election in the year 1969 to the Nagaland Legislative Assembly from No 6 Western Angami Constituency
The polling took place on 6 8 and 10 February 1969 and counting of votes took place on 12 February 1969
The appellant polled 1933 votes
The respondent polled 935 votes
On 12 February 1969 the result of the election was declared and the appellant having secured the majority of valid votes was declared to be elected
The respondent in the election petition alleged that the appellant included in his return as election expenses the sum of Rs 75paid by him to Kohima Printing Press on 17 January 1969 for printing blue identity cards but the appellant did not include in the said return a sum of Rs 90 by him to Kohima Printing Press on 29 January 1969 for printing a set of pink identity cards issued by him
The appellant in his written
statement denied that lie spent IZs
90 for the purpose of printing identity cards that were 661 used by him in any way in his election
The appellant stated that he spent Rs 75 only for printing the identity cards which were used in the election and the same has been properly accounted for in his statement for his election expenses
Under section 1236 of the Representation of the People Act the incurring or authorising of expenditure in contravention of section 77 is a corrupt practice for the purpose of the Act
Section 77 deals with account of election expenses and maximum thereof
The first sub section states that every candidate at an election shall either by himself or by his election agent keep a separate and correct account of all expenditure in connection with the election incurred or authorised by him or by his election agent between the date of publication of the notification calling the election and the date of declaration of the result thereof both dates inclusive
The second sub section states that the account shall contain such particulars  as may  be prescribed
The third subjection states that the total amount shall not exceed such amount as may be prescribed
The prescribed maximum for election expenses is the sum of Rs 1000 as will be found in Rule 902 of the Conduct of Election Rules
That is the sum prescribed for the State of Nagaland for State Assembly Election
For other States different amounts are prescribed as the maximum of election expenses for the State Assemblies
The relevant issue with regard to the alleged expenditure of Rs 90 raises the question as to whether the appellant incurred or authorised the expenditure of the said amount
On behalf of the appellant the owner of the printing press Vipikejeye gave evidence
He said that the appellant placed an order exhibit 10 for 5000 identity cards for election and he also said that Exhibit 1 1 the blue identity cards were printed in his press
The owner of the press further said that the appellant did not personally come to place the order but his party men came and placed the order  The blue identity card was not found suitable and the owner of the printing press printed the pink identity card
The owner was paid Rs 75 for printing 5000 blue identity cards
As for the pinkcards the evidence of the owner of the printing press was that the order for the pink cards was placed on 29 January 1969 by the young man of the appellant
The owner of the press supplied the pink cards numbering 6000 and be received the sum of Rs 90 on 1 February 1969 and one Pralie Peseyie paid that sum and took away the pink identity cards
Pralie Peseyie was said to be a man of the appellant
There was no written order for the printing job
The owner of the press specifically said that he did not receive Rs 90 from the appellant 662 The appellant in his oral evidence said that the blue identity card was ordered by him to be printed and he entrusted one of his worker to do it
On his return the appellant found that there was something wrong in the blue identity cards which contained the words Vote for T N Angami 
The appellant said that he became annoyed and asked
the person entrusted with the printing of the identity cards to go immediately to the printing press and get the cards reprinted correctly
After that the man brought the pink identity card but he did not tell anything about the payment of such printing work and that is how the appellant did not account for them
The appellant accounted for Rs 75 as the cost of printing identity cards
In cross examination the appellant was asked whether he asked Pralie Peseyie to pay the cost of the blue identity card because of the appellant s annoyance
His answer was that he did not say anything specifically but Pralie Peseyie did something wrong and the latter felt shy and did not ask any money from the appellant
The appellant s evidence was that the press submitted the bill for the printing of the blue identity card and the payment was made by the appellant but he did not personally go and pay
In cross examination the appellant was specifically asked whether the pink identity cards were produced before him with the bill
The appellant answered in the negative
The appellant was then asked whether before filing the return the appellant had asked from the press as to what the cost of the printing of the pink identity cards was
The appellant s answer was I bad not paid personally and the bill was not produced before me I did not enquire
The appellant was again asked whether the amount for printing pink identity cards was paid
 His answer was that the amount was paid by Pralie Peseyie
Pralie Peseyie gave evidence on behalf of the appellant and said that the appellant was much annoyed because Pralie Peseyie without the appellant s knowledge put the words Please vote for T N Angami on the blue identity cards and the appellant asked Pralie Peseyie to get the identity cards reprinted
Pralie Peseyie therefore placed order to get 6000 identity cards printed again
He said that he paid Rs 90 from his own pocket as he felt that it was his responsibility to get the cards printed correctly
He also said that he never asked the appellant to reimburse him for that amount of Rs 90
In cross examination he was asked whether he told the appellant that he paid Rs 90
His answer was in the negative
Pralie Peseyie further said that the words Please vote for T N Angami were not on the sample that the appellant gave but the witness added those words without the knowledge of the appellant
The witness was asked a direct question as to what amount the witness spent for the appellant in the election and his 663 answer was I paid Rs 90 for the printing of the pink identity cards and no more
The High Court held that the amount of Rs 90 must have been paid to the press by Pralie Peseyie on behalf of the appellant and therefore the expenditure was incurred by the appellant as well as authorised by him in connection with his election
The respondent in the election petition alleged that the appellant paid Rs 90
The Representation of the People Act uses the words incuffing and authorising the expenditure
The appellant denied that he paid Rs 90
It was never suggested to the appellant that he had authorised the expenditure of Rs 90
On the contrary the positive evidence of the appellant is that he was annoyed with Pralie Peseyie for introducing the words Vote for F N Angami  on the blue identity cards and therefore the appellant wanted Pralie Peseyie to get the cards reprinted correctly
It is also the evidence of Pralie Peseyie that he did something wrong and he had to have it corrected
He therefore paid Rs 90 out of his own pocket
The most significant feature in he evidence is that the bill for Rs 90 was never produced or sent to the appellant whereas the bill for the blue identity cards was sent to the appellant
The manner in which the appellant reprimanded Pralie Peseyie for adding the words Vote for T N Angami would not necessarily involve an obligation to pay and authorise an expenditure for getting the cards reprinted correctly
If it were the fault of the press the press would have to rectify the same
On the other hand if the blame fell on Pralie Peseyie he would have to bear the brunt
The fact that the bill was not sent to the appellant shows that the fault was of the witness Pralie Peseyie The oral evidence also points to that inescapable conclusion
The High Court was in error in holding on the evidence that the expenditure for Rs 90 was incurred or authorised by the appellant
This finding is not supported by the evidence and on the contrary it is repelled by the evidence
We cannot help observing that both the appellant and Pralie Peseyie gave evidence in a very straightforward and truthful Manner
They narrated the correct course of events
We accept their evidence and hold that the appellant neither incurred nor authorised the expenditure of Rs 90 for the pink identity cards
It would therefore not be necessary for us to go into the question whether the sum of Rs 4150 for trunk calls and the sum of Rs 2265 for purchase of forms and hand books were incurred or authorised by the appellant
Even if those two sums of money were added the return would not be in violation of the maximum amount of Rs 1000 
664 Counsel for the respondent contended that the findings of the High Court on allegations contained in paragraph 1a f and j of particulars of corrupt practice mentioned in paragraph 6 of the petition were incorrect and the High Court should have held that the appellant was guilty of corrupt practice
Paragraph 1 a relates to a charge against the appellant of having paid Rs 200 in cash to Dolhoutha Gaonbura of Zubra and one bag of sugar for entertainment of electors attending a function at Zubra on 25 January 1969
Paragraph 1 f alleges that on 27 Janu ary 1969 a women s meeting was held at Daklane when it was announced that a procession would be taken out on 1 February 1969
About 200 people mostly women formed a procession shouted slogans to vote for the appellant and the appellant asked them to vote for him and after the meeting a feast was held at the appellant s house at which drinks were served to the people
Paragraph 1 j alleges that on 27 January 1969 the appellant and his wife and some other persons came to the village Pedugei in connection with the election and held a meeting where the appellant and his wife promised 8 bundles of corrugated iron sheets for the women of Kiruphema with the object of inducing them to vote for the appellant and corrugated iron sheets were later on brought from Dimapur by a truck belonging to Mizielhouto and divided amongst three groups of people
The appellant in the written statement denied the charges
The respondent did not have personal knowledge of the feast alleged in paragraph I a of the particulars but three witnesses were examined on behalf of the respondent
On behalf of the appellant there was the evidence of Dolhoutha and Shitovi Hesso
The High Court held that the three witnesses on behalf of the respondent were interested in the success of the respondent and the three witnesses attributed statements about feast and distribution of sugar to Dolhoutha who denied the same and said that the people of the village organised the feast with their money
The High Court correctly found that the quality of evidence on behalf of the respondent was such that no reliance could be placed upon it
As to allegations of corrupt practice in paragraph 1 f about the women s meeting the High Court held that there was no evidence to indicate that the
respondent or any person induced the persons present to vote or offered them food and fruit
On the contrary the High Court found that evidence of both sides indicated that it was customary practice in Nagaland to offer hospitality to the people who visit their house
It will not be correct to equate ordinary hospitality or courtesy with corrupt practice
With regard to allegations mentioned in paragraph I j and the distribution of bundles of corrugated iron sheets the High Court 665 held that the women s society asked for corrugated sheets for a public cause
The appellant was the Chief Minister at the time of the election
It would not be unnatural for people to make requests to the Chief Minister for a public cause
It would also be reasonable to expect that the Chief Minister would try to redress grievances of the people
There is no proof of corrupt motive
We agree with the High Court that there is no proof of corrupt practice alleged in paragraphs 1 a f and j of the particulars dealt with above
For these reasons we accept the appeal and hold that the appellant is not guilty of any violation of section 123 6 and section 77 of the Representation of the People Act
The judgment of the High Court is set aside
The charge of corrupt practice under section 1236 is set aside
The order setting aside the election of the appellant and the declaration avoiding the election under section 1001b of the Act are both set aside
The election petition of the respondent is dismissed
The appellant will be entitled to costs
KBN Appeal allowed


Summary:
The appellant was elected to the Nagaland legislative assembly
He was at the time of his election Chief Minister of the State
The respondent challenged the election of the appellant on the grounds  i the appellant incurred or authorised the incurring of expenditure beyond the prescribed limit in contravention of section 77 of the Act and thereby committed corrupt practice within the meaning of section 1236 of the Act ii he offered inducements to the electors by giving feasts and entertaining them and iii he distributed bundles of Corrugated iron Sheets to a Women s Society with the object of inducing the members thereof to vote for him
The High Court held that the appellant committed corrupt practice within the meaning of section 1236 and set aside his election
The other corrupt practices were held not proved
Allowing the appeal and dismissing the election petition HELDi The High Court was in error in holding on the evidence that expenditure beyond the prescribed limit was incurred or authorised by the appellant 663 F iiThere was no evidence to indicate that the appellant or any person with his consent or knowledge induced any of the voters to vote for him by offering them food
On the contrary the evidence on both sides indicated that it was customary practice in Nagaland to offer hospitality to the people who visit their house
It would not be correct to equate ordinary hospitability or courtesy with corrupt practice
iiiThere was no corrupt motive in the distribution of bundles of iron sheets
The Society asked for corrugated iron sheets for a public cause
The appellant was the Chief Minister at the time of the election and it would not be unnatural for people to make request to the Chief Minister for a public cause
It would also be reasonable to expect that the Chief Minister would try to redress the grievances of the people
665 D