Sreya Kanugula
The HC of Punjab and Haryana, dismissed the 2002 petition concerning Captain Amarinder Singh’s election to the Legislative Assembly of Punjab filed the same year.
The petitioner, Mr. Harkirat Singh filed this election petition no. 26 of 2002 on the allegation that Captain Singh indulged in several corrupt practices. And that he had portrayed his image as the “Maharaja of Patiala” while running for office, in order to sway voters to his side. Captain Singh had won from the constituency of the Patiala. The petitioner is in fact a voter from the same constituency at the same time.
This petition was dismissed on the grounds that Mr. Singh failed to reveal any material facts in regards to the alleged corruptive practice committed by Captain Singh and thus, failed to fulfill an entire cause of action. After an appeal, the SC set this dismissal aside and remitted the entire case for a second look to be taken in the entirety.
Justice Daya Chaudhary made the observation that no proof has been found and there is no substance to these claims from witness statements that Captain Singh was assisted by gazetted officers during his election.
On such evidence adduced as submitted by Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, the petitioner’s learned counsel, the court stated that mere allegations on corrupt practice only created a shadow of doubt and do not prove anything beyond suspicion. The proof needed to support the crime of corrupt practice taking place is far higher and also strictly confined to legal evidence, was also stated.
The court made the observation that the petitioner had also failed to prove that the elected candidate had spent more than what was prescribed as the limit on the election. Mere probability preponderance is insufficient to prove any of the charges made in the petition.
It was on these grounds that Justice Daya Chaudhary finally dismissed Election Petition No. 26 of 2002 in the case of Harkirat Singh vs. Amarinder Singh, in Punjab and Haryana’s HC.