Om Prabha Jain V. Abnash Chanh Case Study

After pronouncing judgment in Ghasi Ram on February 7, 1968, Hidayatullah, J., decided Om Prabha Jain v. Abnash Chand on the same day dealing with the same issue, i.e., whether making of discretionary grant by a Minister on the eve of election amounts to bribery or not. Applying the test laid down in Ghasi Ram, i.e., "that a Minister in the discharge of his duties may be required to do some acts of administration including the granting of money for the uplift of a certain communities and this action of the Minister is not to be construed against him unless it can be established that there was a bargain with the voters for getting their assistance at the election." Hldayatulah, J., held that whatever the Minister had done was done in the course of her duties as Minister and no direct or indirect bargain was involved thereby bringing the situation within the ambit of corrupt practice of bribery.
In Bhanu Kumar Shastry v. Mohan Lal Sukhadia, too, the commission of corrupt practice of bribery on the eve of …show more content…
and 485 gun licences respectively to induce voters to vote for the respondent as the Chief Minister in various public meetings had promised to help the voters in various ways. In this connection the Supreme Court first said that it must be proved that the Chief Minister had addressed a number of meetings promising to issue gun licences if they would vote for his brother. But the Court found that there was no allegation in the election petition relating to the meetings he addressed or his having held out the promise in those meetings that he would issue gun licences if the people vote for his brother. But at the same time the Court also clarified that even if is proved that the returned candidate or his agent held out an incumbent to get licences issued for people who voted for the returned candidate, it would not amount to bribery. It thus