# SHUBNATH DEOGRAM v. RAM NARAIN PRASAD AND OTHERS

- **Citation:** [1960] 1 S.C.R. 953
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1959-03-20
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 300of1959
- **Bench:** S. K. Das, P. B. Gajendragadkar, A. K. Sarkar, K. SuBBA RAO, M. Hidayatullah
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/shubnath-deogram-v-ram-narain-prasad-and-others-1846
- **Pages:** 15

## Headnote

Election Petition-Corrupt practice-Appeal to vote on grounds
of religion-Leaflet issued by party-Construction of-Representation of the People Act, I95I (43 of I95I), s. Iz3(3).
The appellant, a candidate set up by the Jharkhand Party,
was declared elected to the Bihar Legislative Assembly from the
Manoharpur constit~ency in the district of Singbhum. He was
an Adibasi belonging to 'Ho' community, and the constituency
also consisted of electors belonging largely to' the Adibasi communities of Hos, Mundas and Oraons. The symbol chosen by the
party and allotted by the Election Commission to it was a cock.
The cock was not a religious symbol of the Adibasis but it
formed an integral part of the religious ceremonies which they
performed while worshipping some of their important deities ..
Cocks were often offered as sarcifices to the deities. The Jharkhand Party issued a1leaflet containing an appeal for votes and the
appellant and his agents distributed the leaflet among the
electorate and made speeches in its terms. The leaflet. was in
verse wherein the appeal for votes was made by a cock; the relevant portion was as follows :
" Respected sons of men open your eyes, lend your ears
Recognise me and my crow.
In your services and worships
In the Worship of your forest God (Buru)
In Stomach pain and headache
At the time· of your distress and miseries
1959
October 8
I959
Shubnath Deogram
~.
Ram Narain
Prasad
954
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1)]
I am with you even after giving my life. You recover
(from illness) even by applying knife at my neck. This
thought gives me pleasure. In exchange of this give me
chara in the shape of vote I am victorious. Do not forget
me, otherwise I tell, ye sons of men will suffer eternal
miseries. "
The respondent filed an election petition challenging the
election of the appellant, inter alia, on the ground that in distributing and publishing this leaflet the appellant had committed
the corrupt practice of making a systematic appeal to vote on
grounds of religion.
Held (Subba Rao, J., dissenting), that the leaflet contained an
appeal on the ground of religion and the appellant was guilty of
the corrupt practice charged. The reference to the sacrifice of
the cock was meant to convey to the electors the obtaining of the
pleasure of the deities. When the cock in the leaflet said " give
me chara in the shape of votes ", what it said in substance was
that the giving of such votes would result in pleasing the deities.
The concluding words clearly invoked the wrath of the deities on
the electorate in case they forgot the cock, i.e., forgot to vote for
the party of which it was the symbol.
This was clearly an
appeal on the grounds of religion, for the substance of it was
that it would be an irreligious act not to vote for the party.
Per Subba Rao, J.-The leaflet contains merely an appeal in
metaphorical language and really meant that the candidate (or
the party) would sacrifice his (or its) life for the cause of the
constituency just as the cock sacrificed its life for the happiness
of the people, and just as the people suffered eternal miseries if
the cock was not fed the constituency would suffer if votes were
not given for the candidate (or the Party). Besides, the animal
which w~s sacrificed was not an object of veneration but was only
a convenient or conventional sacrificial medium and it could not
be said that any reference to a sacrificial bird or animal was a
reference to religion.

## Text

,.
-(
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
953
It was then said that we should remand the case
z959
back to the High Court for giving proper hearing to
the appellant, but we do not think that we should
Drc~u:n~:'"
make that order either. All that has happened is
v.
that the High Court has made the order in breach of The s1at1 of Assam
the section and what we are called upon to do is.to set
aside that order. What further action can be taken in
Sarkar J.
accordance with law is for the High Court to decide.
The result, therefore, is that this order of the High
Court is set aside and the appeal is consequently
allowed.
Appeal allowed.
SHUBNATH DEOGRAM
v.
RAM NARAIN PRASAD AND OTHERS
(S. K. DAS, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, A. K. SARKAR,
K. SuBBA RAO and M. HIDAYATULLAH, JJ.)
Election Petition-Corrupt practice-Appeal to vote on grounds
of religion-Leaflet issued by party-Construction of-Representation of the People Act, I95I (43 of I95I), s. Iz3(3).
The appellant, a candidate set up by the Jharkhand Party,
was declared elected to the Bihar Legislative Assembly from the
Manoharpur constit~ency in the district of Singbhum. He was
an Adibasi belonging to 'Ho' community, and the constituency
also consisted of electors belonging largely to' the Adibasi communities of Hos, Mundas and Oraons. The symbol chosen by the
party and allotted by the Election Commission to it was a cock.
The cock was not a religious symbol of the Adibasis but it
formed an integral part of the religious ceremonies which they
performed while worshipping some of their important deities ..
Cocks were often offered as sarcifices to the deities. The Jharkhand Party issued a1leaflet containing an appeal for votes and the
appellant and his agents distributed the leaflet among the
electorate and made speeches in its terms. The leaflet. was in
verse wherein the appeal for votes was made by a cock; the relevant portion was as follows :
" Respected sons of men open your eyes, lend your ears
Recognise me and my crow.
In your services and worships
In the Worship of your forest God (Buru)
In Stomach pain and headache
At the time· of your distress and miseries
1959
October 8
I959
Shubnath Deogram
~.
Ram Narain
Prasad
954
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1)]
I am with you even after giving my life. You recover
(from illness) even by applying knife at my neck. This
thought gives me pleasure. In exchange of this give me
chara in the shape of vote I am victorious. Do not forget
me, otherwise I tell, ye sons of men will suffer eternal
miseries. "
The respondent filed an election petition challenging the
election of the appellant, inter alia, on the ground that in distributing and publishing this leaflet the appellant had committed
the corrupt practice of making a systematic appeal to vote on
grounds of religion.
Held (Subba Rao, J., dissenting), that the leaflet contained an
appeal on the ground of religion and the appellant was guilty of
the corrupt practice charged. The reference to the sacrifice of
the cock was meant to convey to the electors the obtaining of the
pleasure of the deities. When the cock in the leaflet said " give
me chara in the shape of votes ", what it said in substance was
that the giving of such votes would result in pleasing the deities.
The concluding words clearly invoked the wrath of the deities on
the electorate in case they forgot the cock, i.e., forgot to vote for
the party of which it was the symbol.
This was clearly an
appeal on the grounds of religion, for the substance of it was
that it would be an irreligious act not to vote for the party.
Per Subba Rao, J.-The leaflet contains merely an appeal in
metaphorical language and really meant that the candidate (or
the party) would sacrifice his (or its) life for the cause of the
constituency just as the cock sacrificed its life for the happiness
of the people, and just as the people suffered eternal miseries if
the cock was not fed the constituency would suffer if votes were
not given for the candidate (or the Party). Besides, the animal
which w~s sacrificed was not an object of veneration but was only
a convenient or conventional sacrificial medium and it could not
be said that any reference to a sacrificial bird or animal was a
reference to religion.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.
300of1959.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and
order dated March 20, 1959, of the Patna High Court,
in Election Appeal No. 11 of 1958, arising out of the
judgment and order dated May 15, 1958, of the
Election Tribunal, Ranchi, in Election Petition No.
416 of 1957.
Nuru<idin Ahniad and Naunit Lal, for the appellant.
N. C. Chatterjee and P. K. Chatterjee, for the respondents ..
••
/
1
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
955
1959. October 8. The judgment of S. K. Das,
r959
P. B. Gajendragadkar, A. K. Sarkar and M. Hidaya- ..Skubnatk I>Hgr.alfl
tullah JJ. was delivered by A. K. Sarkar, J. Subba
v.
Rao, J., delivered a separate judgment.
R11m Naraiis
SARKAR J.-In the General Elections of 1957, the
Prasiid
appellant was returned to the Bihar Legislative
Sark4, J.
Assembly from the Manoharpur constituency in the
district of Singhbhum. He is a11t Adibasi belonging to
the 'Ho' community. The electors for that constituency largely belonged to the Adibasi communities
of Hos, Mundas and Oraons. There are also people from
Madhya Pradesh and other people belonging to communities other than Adibasis, there. The Hos and
Oraons speak their own respective languages and the
non-Adibasi population is largely Hindi speaking. It
may be that some members of the Adibasi communities speak Hindi also.
The appellant had been set up as a candidate by
the Jharkhand party and was supported by that
party in the election. The object of that party is to
have a separate administrative unit for what it calls
the Jharkhand area. This is an area consisting of
parts of Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and Madhya Pradesh
and is inhabited largely by Adibasis. It is not the
object of the Jharkhand party to have a separate
State for the Adibasis alone but its object is to include
in Jharkhand all people of whatever community,
living in that area and the membership of the party
, ·
is open both to Adibasis & non-Adibasis.
The symbol chosen by the party for the election
was a cock.
This symbol was recognised by the
Election Commission.
Besides the appellant, there were five other candidates contesting the election from the Ma.noha.rpur
constituency.
Among them was respondent No. I,
Ram Nara.in Prasad Yada.b who is a Hindu and does
not belong to any Adibasi community.
He is the
"
only contesting respondent in this appeal and may
hereinafter be conveniently referred to as the respondent.
After the results of the election were declared, lhe
respondent filed an election petition for an order
956
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1)]
c959
declaring the election of the appellant void on the
-
grounds mentioned in it and made all the contesting
ShubMIA Deogram
d'd t
t'
t
't
Th
t't'
d'
·
d
v.
can 1 a es ~ar 1es . o 1 .
e pe 1 10n was 1sm1sse
Ram Narain
by the Elect10n Tribunal. An appeal by the respond.
Prasad
ent to the High Court at Patna from the decision of
the Tribunal succeeded. The appellant has now come
Sarkar J.
up to this Court in further appeal.
Only one of the grounds on which the election petition was based has been canvassed before us.
We
shall therefore concern ourselves in this judgment with
that ground alone. It is said that the appellant published and distributed among the electors of the
constituency two leaflets, being exhibits I and II in
this case, containing appeals for votes on grounds of
religion and thereby committed the corrupt practice
of systematic appeal on grounds of religion under
s. 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
It is also said that the appellant himself and through
his agents solicited votes by reading over and explaining the contents of the leaflets and by making speeches
appealing to religious sentiments and thereby committed the aforesaid corrupt practice. If these corrupt
practices are proved, the election of the appellant has
to be set aside.
The Tribunal held that the Jharkhand party had
got the leaflet printed and that Ex. I contained an
appeal for votes to the electorate on grounds of religion but Ex. II did not. The Tribunal however held
that the onus of proving that the leaflets were distributed and the speeches made, was on the respondent
and this onus he had failed to discharge. In this view
of the matter the Tribunal dismissed the petition.
The High Court held that both the leaflets contained appeals on religious grounds. It a.greed with
the Tribunal that the Jharkha.nd party had got the
leaflets printed.
In the High Court's view -the
Tribunal was wrong in holding that the respondent
had not proved that the leaflets were distributed and
the speeches ma.de. The High Court having considered
the evidence for itself came to the conclusion that
it was sufficient to prove that the leaflets had been
distributed and the speeches ma.de by the appellant
•
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
957
and also by his agents at his instance or witl! his
r959
know ledge and consent. The High Court therefore Sh b th D
.
d
f
T 'b
l
u na
eogram
set aside the or er o the
n unal and dee ared the
v.
election of the appellant void.
Ram Narain
The first question that we will consider is whether
Prasad
the leaflets contained an appeal on grounds of religion.
It seems to us that the leaflet, Ex. II, does not contain any appeal on grounds of religion.
As however,
we have come to the conclusion that the leaflet, Ex. I,
contains such an appeal, we think it unnecessary to
state the reasons why we have come to a conclusion
different from that of the High Court in regard to the
leaflet Ex. II.
The leaflet Ex. I is in these terms :
In the box of the Jharkhand Party is printed
the symbol of Cock.
Put your votes in the box with Cock symbol. '0'
rise ye children of menRespected sons of men open your eyes, lend your
[ears
Recognise me and my crow.
In your services and worships
In the Worship of your forest God (Buru)
In stomach pain and headache
At the time of your distress and miseries
I am with you even after giving my life. You
recover (from illness) even by applying knife at my
neck. This thought giVes me pleasure. In exchange
of this give me chara in the shape of vote I am victorious. Do not forget me, otherwise I tell, ye sons
of men will suffer eternal miseries. Crow of Cock,
Cock crowed, rise now, open Your eyes, be prepared
for duty. Yours only Cock.
The leaflet Ex. I which will hereinafter be referred
to simply as the leaflet, was in Devnagri script but the
language used was the 'Ho ' language. It is said 'to
be in verse. The first sentence is the heading of the
leaflet and it is said that it does not form a part of the
verse contained in it, but nothing turns on that.
It will have been seen that the leaflet is largely
concerned with a cock. It is said that the leaflet by
IU
Sarkar].
958
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1))
z959
referring to the cock appealed to the religious
Shubnath Deogram sentiments of the Adibasis. It is not in .dispute that
v.
cocks are very frequently offered as sacrifices by the
Ram Narain
Adibasis to their deities.
Prasad
Before proceeding to discuss the leaflet we have
Sarkar 1 •
to refer to the findings of the Courts below as to the
religious practices of the Adibasis. Both the Courts
below have arrived at the conclusion that the cock is
not a religious symbol of the Adibasis but it forms an
integral part of the religious ceremonies which they
perform while worshipping some of their important
deities. We will set out here from the judgment of
the High Court how a cock is found to be an integral
part of the religious ceremonies :
" One of the recognised modes of worship of these
deities or some of them is that cocks are sacrificed
before these deities to get happiness and to get rid
of miseries. A cock is kept tied for two days without any food and on the day of the sacrifice it is
taken to the Puja asthan where some rice is put and
after prayers to the Bongas, namely, the deities, for
getting happiness and to get rid of miseries, the cock
is placed near the rice. If the cock pecks at rice, the
Adibasis consider their Bongas to be pleased. They
thereafter sacrifice the cock. If the cock does not peck
at the rice, they consider their deities to be displeased
and prayers are offered until the cock pecks at the
rice when it is sacrificed.
It also appears from the District Gazetteer quoted
in the judgment of the Tribunal that according to the
belief of the ' Hos ',
"All the spirits if not by nature malignanl;-!and
they generally are malignant--require continual
propitiation by means of sacrifices, the belief being
that unless such offerings are made to them, they
are a power for evil. Illness, for instance, is
usually regarded as due to the influence of some
Bonga; and the more serious and continued the
disease, the greater the value of the animal that
must be sacrificed. First, they sacrifice a fowl, and
then if the offering does no good, a goat. If a goat
- I
•
' .
S.O.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
fails to procure relief, they increase the size of
I9S9
the sacrificial animal, immolating one after the Shubnal;-;,.0
0 ,,.
other, a sheep, a calf, a cow and a. buffalo to
v.
P
·appease the ill will of the spirit ... "
RamNarili11
The facts stated in the District Gazetteer have been
PrtUa4
acllepted by the Courts below a.s setting out correctly
the religious practices and sentiments of the Adi5"'
11,., J.
basis.
. Coming now to the terms of the leaflet, it is clear
that it is meant to be an appeal to the electorate.
There is no doubt that the electorate appealed to was
primarily that pa.rt of it which consisted of the
Adibasis. It further seems to us that the a.ppeal was
ma.de in the name of the cock. It ends, ' Yours oilly
cock'. It uses tho words 'me' and 'I' at several
places and they clearly refer to the cock. It was
suggested that. in some places the words refer to the
appellant; We find it impossible to accept the suggestion as such a reading would not fit into the context
at all. It would thus appear that the lea.fl.et purported to be an appeal by the cock, stating that it served
the community even at the cost of its life and that in
exchange for these services " cha.ra ", that· is, food
in the shape of vote should be given to it, which
oould only mean, in the box with the cock symbol,
that is, t.o the Jharkhand party . candidates including
the appellant.
From what we have earlier said a.bout the religious
ceremonies of the Adibasis, it would appear that the
pleasure of the deities is indicated through the cock
ta.king the food that is given to it and that the deities
only thereafter accept the sacrifice of the cock.
Therefore, when the lea.fl.et stated that food should be
given to the cock in the shape of votes what was
meant was that the deities would be pleased if votes
were cast in the box with the cock symbol. Further,
the reference to the religious ceremonies involving the
sacrifice of the cock and the alleviation of pa.in and
miseries thereby, is clearly a. reference to religion. If
the meaning was not what we ha.ve stated earlier, it
is difficult to understand why it was necessary to
refer to the religious ceremonies for the happiness oi
1:160
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1960(1)]
z959
the community involving the sacrifice of cocks. It is
-
important to remember that cocks are sacrificed only
Shubnath Deog.am f
h
h
k d
h ,. d
v.
a ter t ey ave pee e at t e ioo spread before them,
Ram Narain
that is, only after the pleasure of the deities is indicatPrasad
ed through the cocks pecking at the food. That
puts it beyond doubt that by referring to the sacrifice
Sarkar J.
of the cock the obtaining of the pleasure of the deities
was sought to be conveyed. When the cock in the
leaflet said 'give me chara in the shape of vote',
what it said in substance was that the giving of such
votes would result in the deities being pleased. In
our view, any other interpretation would make the
leaflet insensible.
It is said that all that was meant by the leaflet was
that like the sacrificial cock the candidate, that is,
the appellant, was prepared to lay his life down for
the good of the community. We find no language in
the leaflet to convey this meaning. There is nothing
to show that the sacrificial cock w.as being likened to
the appellant. Indeed, there is no reference whatsoever to the appellant in the leaflet. We have earlier
said that the words 'I ' and 'me' do not in the
context they are used, refer to the appellant at all.
Then the sentence ' do not forget me otherwise I
tell, ye sons of men will suffer eternal miseries' in
the leaflet clearly invokes the wrath of the deities
on the electorate in case they forget the cock, that
is, forget to vote for the party of which it is the
symbol, for vote is likened to the food which has to
be given to the sacrificial cock and when the Gods
are displeased the cock does not take the food.
This clearly is an appeal on grounds of religion, for
the substance of it is that it would be an irreligious
act not to vote for the party. It may be that it
would come within the kind of undue influence mentioned in s. I23(2)(a)(ii) of the Representation of the'
People Act, 1951, if practised on an individual elector.
But where, as we shall show later it happened in this
case, this kind of appeal is made systematically to a
large section of the electors, as when the leaflet
is given a large circulation, it would come within
s. 123(3) of the Act. It would then be a corrupt
•
. ,
.,
_,
-
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
961
practice of a systematic appeal on grounds of religion,
z959
It would seem clear that an appeal that it would be a Sh b
eh D
religious act to vote in a certain manner would be an
u na v. eogram
appeal on grounds of religion. If so, it seems equally
Ram Narain
clear that an appeal that a failure to vote in a certain
Prasad
manner .would be against religion, would also be an
appeal on grounds of religion. For these reasons we
agree with the view of the Courts below that the
leaflet contained an appeal on grounds of religion.
The next question is: Was there a systematic appeal?
That depends on the question of fact whether the
leaflet was distributed among the electorate or whether
speeches were made in its terms or otherwise making
an appeal to the electorate on grounds of religion by
the appellant and his supporters with his knowledge
and consent at certain meetings as alleged in the petition. As we have earlier stated, the Tribunal held
that the respondent had failed to prov~ that the
leaflets had been distributed and the speeches made,
but the High Court took a different view. Normally,
it is the practice of this Court to accept the findings on
such questions of fact of the court immediately below.
We see no reason here to depart from that practice.
We are further not convinced by the reasons given
by the Tribunal for rejecting the evidence led by the
respondent on this question. The Tribunal thought
that the evidence was discrepant. One of the discrepancies that it was able to detect was as to the number
of people who attended the 'Hats' (markets) where the
meetings were held in which the leaflets were distributed and the speeches made. But of course it is
impossible to give the exact figure of a big crowd
consisting of two or three thousand or more people.
The other discrepancy pointed out was a& to the hour
of the meeting. But surely, after the length of time
that passed, it would be impossible for any one to
remember the precise hour when a meeting was held
and if witnesses give hours which are somewhat
different, as to when the meetings were held that
would not justify the rejection of their evidence.
Another reason given by the Tribunal for rejecting the
evidence was that it had been stated that the contents
Sarkar].
U62
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1960(1)]
'9'9
of the leaflet had been explained and the speeches
SAub
h D
made in Hindi as well as in the Ho language which the
n"' v. eogram Tribunal thought was unlikely. We see nothing
Ram Narain
unusual there. There were other communities of the
Prasad
Adibasis besides the Hos. There is no evidence that
all the other people understood the Ho language.
Sarktir l·
There were a.gain other communities besides the
Adibasis at the "Hats" who did not speak or understand the Ho language. Again the professed object of the
Jharkhand party was to include in it all communities
living within the Jharkhand area and not to confine
the party to Adibasis only. All this may have been
the reason why the speeches and the explanations had
been in the Hindi language also. As the High Court
pointed out, a witness of the appellant himself stated
that meetings were held and leaflets were distributed
by the appellant and his workers though he did not
mention what was said at-the meetings or what leaflets
were distributed. The High Court rightly observed
that the finding by the Tribunal that the leaflet had
been printed. at the instance of the appellant's party
would go to corroborate the evidence of the respondent's witnesses that it was that leaflet which was
distributed on behalf of the appellant.
In view of all this, there remains no reason to doubt
that part of the evidence of the respondent's witnesses
which states that the leaflet was orally explained and
speeches were made on its lines. This evidence clearly
shows that it was said in the course of the speeches
that the cock wanted that votes should be cast in
favour of the appellant and that the Gods would be
pleased thereby. It would thus appear that even if a
different view is taken of the meaning sought to be
conveyed by the leaflet than what we have earlier
said it bears, there is ample evidence of a systematic
appeal being made for votes orally by the appellant or
at his instance and with his knowledge by his
supporters on grounds of religion. This, as held by
the High Court, would by itself amount to a corrupt
practice by the appellant and would render his election
liable to be avoided.
• I
-·
-
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
963
We, therefore, agree with the view taken by the
r959
High Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with Sh b th D
t
u na
eo gra,,.
cos s.
\'.
Su:BBA RAO J.-I have had the advantage of reading
Ram Narain
the judgment prepared by my learned brother,
Prasad
Sarkar, J. I regret my inability to agree with him.
Subba:Rao 1
The facts are fully stated in his judgment and I
need not restate them here. The High Court gave t\YO
findings : (i) by issuing Exs. I and II, the appellant
ma.de an appeal to the electorate to vote for him on
grc)unds of religion; and (ii) on behalf of respondent
Nd. I various meetings were held in different parts of
the constituency wherein appeals were made on the
basis of Exs. I and IL I do not understand the second
finding to mean that the appeals so made were different
from those disclosed in Exs. I and II.
To state it
differently, the first finding related only to the contents
of the appeals, and the second finding was confined to
the systematic nature of the appeals. Indeed the learned
Judges in considering the question of systematic
appeals observed that there was bound to be some
differences in the account which each witness gave
regarding what he had seen and heard in those
meetings, and, therefore, they accepted the witnesses'
version that various meetings were held wherein Exs. l
and II were read over and explained in Hindi. I will,
therefore, proceed on the basis that what was read in
the meetings was only the contents of Exs. I and II.
The only outstanding question, therefore, depends
upon the construction of the contents of Exs. I and II.
At the outset Ex. II can easily be eliminated from
consideration, for, that document does not contain
any appeal to vote on grounds of religion. The learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondents,
therefore, rightly concentrated their attention on
Ex. I. As the ai:gument turns upon the contents of
that document, it would be as well that I read it.
Ex. I reads as follows:
In the box of the Jha.rkand Party is printed the
symbol of Cock.
Put your votes in the box with Cock symbol ' 0 '
rise ye children of men -
r959
Shubnath Deogram
v.
Ram Narain
Prasad
Subba Rao .T.
964
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1960(1)]
Respected sons of men open your eyes, lend your
ears, recognise me and my crow.
In your services and worships
In the worship of your forest God (Burn)
In stomach pain and head-ache
At the time of your distress and miseries
I am with you even after giving my life.
You recover (from illness) even by applying knife at my
neck. This thought gives me pleasure. In exchange
of this give me chara in the shape of vote.
I am
victorious. Do not forget me, .otherwise I tell, ye
sons of men will suffer· eternal miseries. Crow of
Cock, Cock crowed, rise now, open your eyes, be
prepared for duty, yours only Cock.
Before considering this document it may be convenient to read the relevant provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, (hereinafter called the
Act).
S. 123: The following shall be deemed to be corrupt
practices for the purposes of this Act :-
•
.
.
(3) The systematic appeal by a candidate or his
agent or by any other person, to vote or refrain
from voting on grounds of caste, race, community
or religion or the use of, or appeal to, religious
symbols or the use of, or appeal to, national symbols,
such as the national flag or the national emblem, for
the furtherance of the prospects of that candidate's
election.
The material part of the section relevant to the
enquiry prohibits systematic appeal to vote or refrain
from voting on grounds of religion.
This section
defines corrupt practices which invalidate an election.
Being a penal section, it must be strictly construed.
This hits at canvassing of votes for, or against, a candidate on grounds of religion.
A may ask B to vote
for him on the ground that A and B belong to the
same religion. C may ask B to vote for A on the
ground that both A and B profess the same religion,
or C may ask B not to vote for D on the ground that
D belongs to a religion different from that of B. These
are direct appeals to religion as a ground of preference,
•,
, ..
..
S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
965
But there may also be an appeal which indirectly but
z959
by necessary implication invites votes on grounds of
-,.
D
:
1. ·
Wh t ·
· 1 th
£
·
h
th Skubnat
eogram ,
re ig10n.
a is essent1a ,
ere ore, IS t at ·
e
v.
appeal should, expressly or by necessary implication,
Ram Narain
seek votes on grounds of religious affinity or religious
Prasad
conflict.
This section is not obviously intended to prevent
appeals in picturesque or metaphorical language drawing analogies from mythology, religion or folklore.
When most of the voters are illiterate, the candidate
or his agent can attract and enthuse the audience or
drive home his points only by parables, similes or
metaphors drawn particularly from religious lore
which most of the people understand and appreciate.
A distinction must, therefore, be drawn betwe~n canvassing on grounds of religion and seeking of votes in
graphic or picturesque language with analogies from
religious lore: to illustrate, a candidate may appeal to
the electorate consisting of persons professing different
religions, say Hindus, Mohammadans, Christians etc.,
to vote for him and say that he would sacrifice his life
in the cause of his constituency just like Christ sacrificed his life to redeem the world. He may also say
that like Rama, the virtuous, who killed Ravana, the
rakshasa, the embodiment of evil, he would, if elected,
put down corruption, nepotism and the like in Government. He may' even say that he would sacrifice
himself as a goat before Kali to bring happiness and
prosperity to his constituency.
All these similes are
drawn from religion, but they do not embody an
appeal, directly or indirectly, to vote for the candidate
on grounds of religion.
Coming to the offending document, let us see whether it contains an appeal to vote on grounds of religion. The appeal was intended to be made to an
electorate comprising of voters of many religions,
,though an appreciable part of it were Adibasis. The
appeal might have been read at the meetings by
persons who were not Adibasis to an audience which
might or might· not have contained Adibasis. The
symbol , of cock was allotted without objection by the
i~i
Subba Rao].
966
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1960(1)]
z959
Election Commissioner to Jharkhand Party, which
Sh ····•h D
admittedly consisted of member other than Adibasis.
u~-
eogramTh
1 .
h d .
.
d
.
v.
e appea
1s couc e
m poet10 an
p10turesque
Ram Narain
language. It opens with the statement that the
Prasad
symbol of the Jharkhand Party is the cock and the
said symbol is printed on the box of the Party. It
Subba Rao J.
then exhorts the voters to put their votes in the said
box with the cock symbol. Then there is the exhortation to the voters to open their eyes and recognize the
box and its cock.
Then comes the appeal by parable.
The cock symbol on the box and the sacrificial cock
are not kept distinct, and the address is made in a
metaphorical language.
If literally understood it
means that the cock on the box sacrifices its life with
pleasure to relieve the distress of the people, such as
their stomach and head aches, and therefore it asks
them to give it food in the shape of vote ; and tells
them that if no such food is given, the people will
suffer eternal miseries. If literally understood, this
part of the appeal does not convey any sense. On the
other hand, if the metaphor involved in the poem is
expanded, it can only mean that "I, the cock in the
box ", i.e., the candidate or the Party, will sacrifice his
or its life for the cause of the constituency, just like
the cook sacrificing its life for the happiness of the
people; and, just like the people who suffer eternal
miseries if the cock is not fed, the constituency will
suffer if votes are not given for the candidate or th"
Party. It may be noticed that no specific mention of
Adibasis or their religion is made in the document. At
the worst the document is capable of two interpretations : the one gives it an understandable content, and
the other imputes to it a confusion of ideas involving
a corrupt practice.
Under such circumstances, I
would prefer to read the document in a way beneficial
to the elected candidate and to uphold his election
rather than to impute corrupt practice to him on
doubtful considerations and set aside his election.
There is also another aspect of the case and that is ;
what is the religion of the Adibasia ? They are a.
backward community and .they do not appear to have
any highly evolved religion. Presumably, they a.re
-
-
S.C.R.
SUPREME COCRT REPORTS
967
all Hindus. "The peculiarity of the Hindu religion is
x959
its universality.
Along with its worship of gods, Sh b th D
d
f
d
k
h
.
u na
eogram
goddesses, an even o trees an sna es, t ere exists
v.
vedant philosophy which raise3 man himself to
Ram Narain
Godhood." These Adibasis, who are Hindus, appease
Prasad
different spirits alleged to govern different diseases and
misfortunes, by sacrifices, which range from a cock to
Subba Rao J.
a buffalo, depending upon the magnitude of the
calamity expected to be averted. It is well-known
that not only Adibasis but also many other backward
communities in India sacrifice animals to appease
spirits and deities. The animal which is sacrificed is
not an object of veneration, but only a convenient or
conventional sacrificial medium. It cannot, therefore,
be said that any reference to a sacrificing bird or
animal is a reference to religion. It would be rather
enlarging the scope of the disqualification if we should
hold that a reference to a sacrificial bird or animal is
canvassing on a ground of religion of Adiba.sis; for,
such sacrifices are common not only among the
Adibasis but also among many other backward
communities.
For the aforesaid reasons, I hold that Ex. I does
not contain an appeal by the appellant for votes on
grounds of religion.
In the result, the order of the High Court is set
aside and the election petition is dismissed with costs.
ORDER OF QOURT
In accordanee with the opinion of the majority this
appeal is dismissed with costs.