Supreme Court of India Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Shri Raj Narain & Anr on 7 November, 1975 Equivalent citations: AIR 1975 SUPREME COURT 2299, 1976 2 SCR 347 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 887 of 1975 PETITIONER: INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI RESPONDENT: SHRI RAJ NARAIN & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/11/1975 A.N. RAY (CJ) & H.R. KHANNA & K.K. MATHEW & M.H. BEG & Y.V. CHANDRACHUD JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 1975 AIR 2299 1976 (2) SCR 347 1975 Suppl. SCC 1 Civil Appeals Nos. 887 and 909 of 1975 The Judgment was delivered by RAY, C.J. : RAY, C.J. for the In Civil Appeal No. 887 of 1975 the appellant is Indira Nehru Gandhi and the respondent is Raj Narain. Civil Appeal No. 909 of 1975 is the cross objection of the respondent. On July 14, 1975 it was directed that both the appeals would be heard together. The appeals arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dated June 12, 1975. The High Court held that the appellant held that the appellant held herself out as a candidate from December 29, 1970 and was guilty of having committed corrupt practice by having obtained the assistance of gazetted officers in furtherance of her election prospects. The High Court further found the appellant guilty of corrupt practice committed under section 123(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter referred to as the 1951 Act by having obtained the assistance of Yashpal Kapur a gazetted officer for the furtherance of her election prospects. The High Court held the appellant to be disqualified for a period of six years from the date of 2. It should be stated here that this judgment disposes of both the appeals. Under directions of this Court the original record of the High Court was called for. The appeal filed by the respondent with regard to issues Nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9 formed the subjectmatter of cross objections in Civil Appeal No. 909 of 1975. The cross objections are the same which form grounds of appeal filed by the respondent Allahabad against an order of dismissal of Civil Misc. Writ. No. 3761 of 1975 filed 3. The Constitution (Thirtyninth Amendment) Act, 1975 contains three principal features. First, Article 71 has been substituted by a new Article 71. The new Article 71 states that subject to the provisions of the Constitution, Parliament may by law regulate any matter relating to or connected with the election of a President or VicePresident including the grounds on which such election may be questioned. 4. The second feature is insertion of Article 329A in the Constitution. Clause 4 of Article 329A is challenged in the present appeals. There are six clauses in Article 329A. 5. The first clause states that subject to the provisions of Chapter II of Part V [except subclause (e) of clause (1) of Article 102] no election to either House of Parliament of a person who holds the office of Prime Minister at the time of such election or is appointed as Prime Minister after such election; and to the House of the People of a person who holds the office of Speaker of that House at the time of such election or who is chosen as the Speaker for that House after such election; shall be called in question, except before such authority [not being any such authority as is referred to in clause (b) of Article 329] or body and in such manner as may be provided for by or under any law made by Parliament and any such law may provide for all other matter relating to doubts and disputes in relation to such election including the grounds on which such election may be questioned. 6. Under the second clause the validity of any such law as is referred to in clause (1) and the decision of any authority or body under such law shall not be called in question in any court. 7. The third clause states that where any person is appointed as Prime Minister or, as the case may be, chosen to the office of the Speaker of the House of the People, while an election petition referred to in Article 329 (b) in respect of his election to either House of Parliament or, as the case may be, to the House of the People is pending, such election petition shall abate upon such person being appointed as Prime Minister or, as the case may be, being chosen to the office of the Speaker of the House of the People, but such election may be called in question under any such law as is referred to in clause (1). 8. The fourth clause which directly concern the present appeals states that no law made by Parliament before the commencement of the Constitution (Thirtyninth Amendment) Act, 1975, in so far as it relates to election petitions and matters connected therewith, shall apply or shall be deemed ever to have applied to or in relation to the election of any such person as is referred to in clause (1), to either House of Parliament and such election shall not be deemed to be void or ever to h