Fifth General Elections in India (1971-72)

REPORTON THE

FIFTH GENERAL ELECTIONSIN INDIA

1971-72

NARRATIVE AMD REFLECTIVE PA

1. " since it is plainljf contrary to the law of nature, howeverdefined, that children should command 'old men, fools wise men,and that the privileged few should gorge themselves with superfluities,while the starving multitude are in want of, the |tare necessities oflife." ,v .#

—Jean Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract.

2. "The greatest menace to freedom is an inert people."—per Brandies, J., in Whitney vs. California,

(1927) 274 u.s. 357 at p. 375.

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

P R E F A C E

The Fifth General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the early part of1971 and the Fifth General Elections to the Legislative Assemblies of 19States and Union territories a year thereafter marked the culmination ofmomentous events in the political and election history of India. As amatter of fact, the period after the Fourth General Elections of 1967 wasa very crucial period. The political atmosphere in the country underwenta remarkable change. In the 1967 General Elections the Indian NationalCongress lost its overwhelming majority in the House of the People whichit had hitherto enjoyed in that House and could form a government attine Ceivtie with what might be regarded as a slender majority; it also failedto form government in a number of States because it failed to win anymajority at all. This was followed in a number of States by the formationof coalition governments known variously as United Front or SVD(Samyukta Vidhayak Dal) governments and a period of instability,governmental, administrative and political and a spell of President's rule.Bickerings of a very mean type started among the political parties andrumblings of discontent and dis-satisfaction started becoming audiblewithin a number of parties, and specially, the Indian National Congress.Factionalism and groupism raised their heads. The politicians by andlarge forgot the greater and broader interests of the country. Everyattempt started being made tO'push into the background those few amongthe politicians who thought in terms of national interests. It was said ofGeorge Washington that among the politicians of his time only he and afew others could think "continentally". Here also after the 1967—FourthGeneral Elections—only a microscopic few among the politicians couldthink in terms of India as a whole, but, as already stated, their positionwas extremely precarious. Indeed this period was the darkest periodin the political history of India after Independence. It was clearthat India was in the middle of the deepest and darkest woods andwas groping for a way out. In this state of affairs mid-term generalelections had to be held in a number of States in 1968-69, such as,Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal. But the politi-cal problems to solve which these mid-term general elections were held,showed hardly any signs of abatement; on the contrary, they becameworse and more complex in States like West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradeshand Punjab. At this critical juncture of our history came the suddendeath of the serving President, Dr. Zakir Husain, on the 3rd May, 1969,and the already dark political situation became darker and the wholeatmosphere became very acute, tense and exciting throughout the wholecountry over the selection of the Presidential candidate in July of thatyear. Even the other important political parties got involved in the issue.This controversy brought to the surface the simmering discontent whichwas accumulating in the Indian National Congress and this led to theGreat Schism in the Indian National Congress to which there was hardlyany parallel in the history of political parties in the world. Perhaps, theonly case, which came near this Great Divide was the Great Schism inthe Whig Party in Great Britain in the year 1796. This split in its turn

(ii)

led to the great Congress Symbol case. Even before the decision in thatcase was given by the Election Commission, the President dissolved, onthe advice of the Prime Minister, the House of the People in the night ofthe 27th December, 1970 about fifteen months before the expiration ofits normal duration of five years. In this state of tension, stress, confusionand flux, the prophets of doom, both inside and outside the country,started expressing serious misgivings and doubts as to the very survival ofdemocracy in this Great Land. In this they perhaps derived some secretmental joy and delight. They, perhaps, forgot that in any major crisisin the history of India from ancient times the deathless Spirit of this Landsurvived the onslaught of adverse and hostile circumstances. The peopleof this great and ancient land had all through history shown an uncannysense which impelled them so to say, in doing what was best for the goodof the country and saved the land from any disaster which might other-wise have befallen the whole race. The Supreme Dispenser of India'sDestiny (Bharata Bhagya Vidhata) on every such occasion had blowninto the soul of India that elixir-giving inspiration which imparted reju-venated vigour to her vital, moral and spiritual forces. Sri Aurobindomany years back in a letter to his young wife, while describing his thirdmadness said—"Whereas others regard the country as an inert object andknow it as the plains, the fields, the forests, the mountains and the rivers,I know my country as the Mother, I worship and adore it as the Mother".The people of this country—the Gana Devata (mass-dei), did assertthemselves this time also to vindicate the honour of the Mother by ensur-ing the safety of Democracy and free government of the people. Whichparty won the election was not very material because in a free demo-cracy there must necessarily be more political parties than one and thepeople may choose at any particular time any particular political partyto take the reins of the government. As the great democrat ThomasJefferson said in a letter to John Adams on June 27, 1813, at any timeand place where men are free to think and to speak, differences in opinionwill lead to formation of different political parties. It is no doubt highlydesirable that the number of such political parties should be limited. But.that again will depend upon the free opinion and free action of the citi-zens. What is of material importance for our purpose is that the peopleby the exercise of their free will sent one political party to the Lok Sabhawith an absolute majority. The misgivings and doubts, which were,entertained and expressed about the survival of democracy in India, werethus dispelled by the Fifth General Elections to Lok Sabha.

The Fifth General Elections to the various Legislative Assemblies ayear later were held in a better atmosphere, notwithstanding some spora-dic violent incidents here and there. We should not forget in this con-nection that the electorate in this country is in the neighbourhood of about300 millions and the total population is more than 547 millions. There-fore, it is not always possible to exclude some disturbances here and thereduring the period of countrywide general elections.

In preparing this Report I have tried to deal with and analyse thevarious facts, events and circumstances, which cropped up in connectionwith these two countrywide general elections and their tendencies andimplications.

(iii)

One special feature of this Report which may be of use and interest tothe readers relates to detailed information given partywise of candidateselected in the Fifth General Elections with fifty per cent or more of thevotes polled and of those elected with less than fifty per cent of the votes.

In the conduct of the elections great help was received from the variousagencies of the Government, such as the Press Information Bureau, theAll India Radio, the Directorate of Advertising & Visual Publicity, theFilms Division and the Posts and Telegraphs Department, and from thevarious news agencies, the newspapers throughout the country, the Govern-ment of India Presses and the various State Government Presses throughoutthe country. I avail myself of this opportunity to express my sincerethanks as well as sincere thanks of the Commission to each of them.

I shall be failing in my duty if I do not express my appreciation of thehelp and assistance received from Shri A. N. Sen, Secretary of the Elec-tion Commission of India. He made available to me at very short noticefrom the records of the Secretariat of the Commission whatever materialsI requested him to supply, to Shri K. Ganesan, Under Secretary (Legal)and Shri P. N. Mago, Superintendent (Legal) for their help in makingavailable to me the files relating to various matters on which I recordedcopious notes on points of election law, practice and procedure and cons-titutional law and also for their close scrutiny with the help of Shri L. C.Goel, Assistant (to whom also I express my sincere thanks) of the finalmanuscript before sending it to the Prefs; and to Shri R. D. Sharma,Under Secretary in charge of Statistics and Delimitation work for makingavailable to me the figures and statistics relating to general elections.Lastly, my heartfelt thanks are due to Shri M. L. Sard of my personal staffwho bore the main burden of taking dictation of this Report, to Shri O. P.Wadhawan, my Senior Personal Assistant who also took some dictation, toShri A. D. Ahuja also of my personal staff who did a lot in comparing thetyped copies, and, to Shri Tilak Raj, my Private Secretary, under whosedirection, supervision and guidance all of them worked. I also expressmy sincere thanks to Shri P. K. S. Narayanan, Section Officer, Shri S. D.Pershad, Assistant, Shri S. K. Mendiratta, Assistant, Shri T. S. Dali, Assis-tant and Shri Ram Chander, Assistant for their services in supplying to methe necessary material for the preparation of this report and also for meti-culously checking the proofs. I am also recording my high appreciation of thepersonal services rendered by my jamadar, Shri Mangat Ram who has beenmuch more to me than "Jeeves" was to his master. But for their help andco-operation it would not have been possible for me to finish the Reportwithin the short space of time which was available to me for this purposebefore relinquishing charge of office of the Chief Election Commissioner ofIndia.

S. P. SEN-VARMA,Chief Election Commissioner of India

New Delhi,

The 29th September, 1972.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

FIFTH GENERAL ELECTION TO THE LOK SABHA, 1971

Page No.

Chapter I Dissolution of the House of the People 1—10

Chapter II Electoral Rolls and Preparation for Holding the General Election 11—18

Caapter HI Adult Franchise and its Implications — A lesson and A Warning 19—26

Chapter IV Writs and Programmes for the General Election . . . 27—38

Chapter V From Nomination to Withdrawal of Candidatures . . . 39—44

Chapter VI The Campaign Period 45—70

Chapter VII The Poll 71—91

Chapter VIII The Counting of Votes and the Declaration of Results > . 92—122

PART II

FIFTH GENERAL ELECTION TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE

ASSEMBLIES, 1972

Chapter IX General Elections to the Legislative Assemblies . . • . 123—176

PART III

GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS

Chapter X Election Expenses 177—186

Chapter XI Corrupt Practices in Elections and Election Petitions . . 187—198]

Chapter XII Innovations and Improvements 199—206

Chapter XIII Unreason in Election Politics . . . . . . 207—234

Chapter XIV Reflections on the Change of Election System : The List System 235—-243

Chapter XV Conclusion 244—245

REPORT

ON

THE FIFTH GENERAL ELECTIONS, 1971-72

"The spirit of true equality is as far from that of extreme equality, as thesky is from the earth. The first does not consist in a system whereeveryone commands or no one takes orders, but in a system in whichone commands and obeys one's own equals. Its aim is not to have nomasters at all, but to have only one's equals as masters."

— Montesquieu, — L'Espirit des lois,Bk. VIII, Chapter II.

"If democracy is to survive it will have to employ and use everybit of skill and knowledge and leadership it can get hold of. Thiscomplicated interdependent world, in which we are living cannot be runwithout knowledge and skill, foresight and leadership. Any cult ofincompetence can only lead to disaster."

— A. D. Lindsay, The Modern DemocraticState, page 261.

Part I

THE FIFTH GENERAL ELECTION TO THE LOK SABHA, 1971

CHAPTER I

DISSOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

1. "There is a tide in the affairs of menWhich, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;Omitted, all the voyage of their lifeIs bound in shallows and in miseries."

— Shakespeare, Julius Caesar,Brutus to CassiusAct IV, Sc. III.

2. "To be, or not to be: that is the question,Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to sufferThe slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,And by opposing end them."

— Shakespeare, Hamlet, Hamlet's Soliloquy,Act III, Sc. I.

3. "No politician can make a situation. His skill consists in hiswell playing the game dealt to him by fortune following theindications given him by nature, times and circumstances."

— Edmund Burke in a letter to GilbertElliot (1st Lord Minto, GovernorGeneral of India from 1807-1813),quoted by Lord Morley, Secretary ofState for India in a letter to GovernorGeneral and Viceroy, Lord Minto onJune 17, 1908 — Vide "India, Mintoand Morley" (1934) by Mary, Countessof Minto at page 241.

The Schism of Indian National Congress reduced the ParliamentaryParty of that group of the Congress of which Shrimati Indira Gandhi wasthe Leader and Shri Jagjivan Ram was the President to a minorityin the Lok Sabha consisting of about 520 members at that time. Thestrength of that group which by that time had come to be known asCongress (R) was a little less than 225. Therefore, the governmentled by the Prime Minister Shrimati Indira Gandhi after the Split had todepend in the House of the People to which it was collectively responsi-ble, for the approval of its policies and actions, for the enactment oflaws sponsored by it, for the sanctioning of the money demanded, andother financial measures proposed by it, on the support of other partiesand groups in Parliament. The position in any parliamentary democracy of aPrime Minister who heads a minority government is always a precarious one.The Prime Minister of such a minority government is always between thehorns of a dilemma. On the one hand, he or she might like to havethe policies and actions of the Government quickly approved by Parliamentbut on the other hand, he or she even in spite of the best intentions

2 DISSOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

might not be in a position to go the whole hog, because he or she couldnot do so unless assured of support from other parties and groups. Andthere may not be always any assurance of such support. In such a pre-dicament the position of the Leader of the party in power becomes almostintolerable. Ultimately a moment comes when a bold decision is requiredand a step forward becomes necessary regardless of the consequenceswhich may follow the taking of such decision and step.

It seems these considerations impelled Shrimati Indira Gandhi to advisethe President to dissolve the House of the People in the night of the 27thDecember, 1970. This inference is supported by her speech which wasbroadcast to the Nation from the All India Radio, New Delhi, in thatvery night shortly after the issue of the President's Order under Article85 (2) (b) of the Constitution dissolving the House of the People. Inher speech she said—

"There comes a time in the life of a Nation when the government ofthe day has to take an unusual step to cut through difficulties in order tosolve the pressing problems with which the country is beset."

"The present is such a time. Therefore, on the advice of the Councilof Ministers, the President has dissolved the Lok Sabha before its fullterm. In a parliamentary democracy this is not unusual, but in India ithas happened for the first time."

Why she took this step in advising the President to dissolve the Houseof the People, she explained in the course of her broadcast—

"It is because we are not merely concerned with remaining in powerbut with using that power to ensure a better life to the vast majority ofour people and to satisfy their aspirations for a just social order. In thepresent situation, we feel we cannot go ahead with our proclaimed prog-ramme and keep our pledges to our people."

Several points were raised after the dissolution of the Lok Sabha bythe President. In the first place, the point was raised by some personsthat the President had no power to dissolve the Lok Sabha before thecompletion of its normal duration of five years referred to in clause (2)of article 83 of the Constitution. It must be said that those who raisedtiiis point had not carefully read the provisions of our Constitution orwere not conversant with the British constitutional practice in this con-nection which has been formulated in words in our Constitution in blackand white in article 83 (2) and in article 85 (2). Under article 83 (2)it is laid down that the House of the People, unless sooner dissolved,shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meetingand no longer and the expiration of the said period of five years shalloperate as a dissoluton of the House. It is not necessary to refer to theproviso in this connection, but the words "unless sooner dissolved" arevery pertinent in this connection. They clearly show that the House ofthe People may be dissolved sooner than the expiration of the period offive years. Then, article 85 (2) clearly provides inter alia that "the

DISSOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE 3

President may from time to time dissolve the House of the People." Thewords in italics above are important in this connection. They showthat the President has the power to dissolve the House of the Peoplefrom time to time.

Moreover, in principle also it seems almost unthinkable that the Headof the State in a parliamentary democracy in which the Government,that is, the Council of Ministers, is collectively responsible to the LowerHouse of the Legislature, should not have the power to dissolve the LowerHouse before the expiration of its normal duration. If such were theconstitutional position, then even a breakdown of the Constitution mightbe the result. Suppose, the party in power enjoys majority in the Housebut only a slender one or has ceased to enjoy majority in the House. Thenif the President has no power of dissolution on the advice of the PrimeMinister, that is, of the Council of Ministers, then the Council of Ministersmay take a decision to resign (and no one can stop such resignation)to avoid criticism for its failure or inability to carry into effect its pro-mises made to the electorate at the time of election and if in such acontingency the opposition parties are not in a position to form a Govern-ment because they do not command a majority or because they fail toagree to form a Government, then the result is a constitutional deadlock.But even then, the House of the People must, on our hypothesis, continuebecause it must run its full course, and no one can dissolve it. Or suppose,none of the parties after the election has any majority in the House toenable it to form a Government, even then the House will continue inexistence. Thus it is easy to envisage a situation which will mean anend of a parliamentary democracy and the emergence of an irresponsibleGovernment in the shape of Presidential form of Government or in theshape of an irresponsible Council of Ministers or the emergence of pureanarchy. In other words, in a parliamentary democracy with a cabinetform of Government where the Council of Ministers is collectively res-ponsible to the Lower House, the full term for the Lower House cannotbe ensured and guaranteed in the Constitution; the power to dissolve theLower House before the expiration of its full term must be vested in theHead of the State. The power of earlier dissolution of the Lower Housethus is inherent in the very concept of parliamentary democracy. It isonly where as in a Presidential form of Government where the Executiveis not responsible to the Legislature, that the Lower House enjoys itsfull span of life as fixed by the Constitution. This is why in a parliamentarydemocracy members of the Lower House have no fixed term of office.Thus, there is no provision either in the Constitution of India or in theRepresentation of the People Act, 1951 fixing a term of the office of themembers of the House of the People. Article 83 (1) lays down that theCouncil of States shall not be subject to dissolution but as nearly as possi-ble one-third of the members thereof shall retire as soon as may be onthe expiration of every second year. Then section 154 of the Representa-tion of the People Act, 1951 provides for a fixed term of office for themembers of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha), namely, six years butthere is no section in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 provid-ing any fixed term of office either for a member of the House ofthe People or for a member of the State Legislative Assembly.A fixed term of office is also provided for a member of the Legis-lative Council of a State which is the Upper House of the State Legislature


in some States under section 156 of the aforesaid Act. We may now referto the constitutional provisions of some other countries.

Section 50 of the British North America -Act, 1867, which is theConstitution of Canada provides as follows : —

"Duration of 50. — Every House of Commons shallHouse of continue for Five Years from the day ofCommons. the Return of the Writs for choosing

the House (subject to be sooner dis-solved by the Governor General), andno longer."

Simlarly, section 28 of the Australian Constitution as incorporated in theCommonwealth of Australia Constitution Act reads as follows :—

"28.—Every House of Representa-tives shall continue for three years fromthe first meeting of the House, and nolonger, but may he sooner dissolved bythe Governor General."

I am referring only to the constitutional provisions of Canada andAustralia because parliamentary democracy in these two countries on thepattern of Great Britain has been in vogue for a long time, in Canada sincethe year 1867 and in Australia since the year 1900. Thus, as has beenmentioned earlier, the power to dissolve the Lower House of the Legislatureearlier than the expiration of its normal duration is inherent in parliamentarydemocracy in which the Executive Government, namely, the Council ofMinisters is collectively responsible to the Lower House. But this is notso in a Presidential form of Government where the Chief Executive, namely,the President is an irresponsible executive, that is, he is not responsible tothe Legislature at all. And only in such a case the Lower House of theLegislature has a fixed term of duration which means that every memberof the Lower House holds office for a fixed term of years. Thus, section2(1) of Article 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America isas follows :

"The House of Representatives shall be composed of memberschosen every second year by the people of the several States,and the electors in each State shall have the qualifications requi-site for electors of the most numerous branch of the StateLegislature."

From the above provisions of the Constitution of the United States, it willappear that every member of the House of Representatives has, unlike amember of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom Parliament orof the House of Commons of the Canadian Parliament or of the House ofRepresentatives of the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia or of theHouse of the People of the Parliament of India, a fixed term of years andthis is because the Chief Executive is not responsible to the House and theLegislative Branch and the Executive Branch of the Government performtheir functions more or less on parallel and co-ordinate lines.


In Great Britain dissolution of Parliament hardly coincides with itsmaximum life of five years. As Glyn Parry observes in his book "BritishGovernment" (1969) at pages 56 et seq-—

"Whilst the maximum life of Parliament is five years, since 1832only one Parliament, namely, the 1959-64 Parliament, (theWar Parliaments of 1914-18 and 1939-45 are exceptions herebecause of the extraordinary situations) has lasted the full termprovided by the Statute. All other Parliaments have been dis-solved by the Monarch, on the advice of the Prime Minister,before they have run their full term. In other words, thehead of the Government of the day determines the date of theGeneral Election, and he usually decides on a date, within thelast two years of the life of Parliament, which is most favour-able to the fortunes of his party."

The opposition parties may not naturally like this but this is an advantageenjoyed by the party in power in every country where parliamentary systemof government prevails. And dissolution of Parliament is a very handyinstrument with the Executive Government. Whenever the Governmentconsiders that the time is favourable for obtaining the people's verdict forits party, any intelligent government would not desist from advising theHead of the State to dissolve Parliament. As Ian Gilmour has observed inhis Book "The Body Politic" (1969) at page 152,—

"Certainly dissolution is too useful a weapon for Governments toneglect."

This being the constitutional position in our country which is in accordancewith the constitutional position in Great Britain on whose model our Consti-tution has been framed, there was hardly any substance in the point whichwas raised after the dissolution of the Lok Sabha on the 27th December,1970.

Then, the point was raised as to whether the Government headed byShrimati Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister could constitutionally continuein office after such dissolution. Here also I should say there was no sub-stance in the point raised. A writ petition was filed before the MadrasHigh Court challenging the authority of the Council of Ministers to continuein office after the dissolution of the Lok Sabha. The writ petition was dis-missed by the High Court. An appeal against the decision of the HighCourt was taken to the Supreme Court. The name of the case is U.N.R.Rao Versus Smt. Indira Gandhi AIR (1971) S.C. 1002. In that case theSupreme Court held that —

(i) In interpreting the Constitution, which established a Parlia-mentary form of Government as in the United Kingdom, theconventions prevalent at the time the Constitution was framed.should be kept in mind.

(ii) Article 53 (1) vests executive powers in the President but thePresident too is not above the Constitution. The oath takenby him under article 60 also binds him.

3EC/72-2


(iii) Article 74 (1) like article 52 is mandatory and, therefore, theword 'shall' should not be read as 'may' otherwise the wholeconcept of Executive will be changed. The President cannotexercise the executive power without the 'aid and advice' ofthe Council of Ministers. He is the 'formal head' ofthe Executive though the real power lies in the cabinet.

This finding of the Supreme Court is exactly in consonance with theBritish constitutional practice. In Great Britain also on the dissolution ofParliament the Ministry does not cease to exist or is not required to resign;the Ministry continues in office. Even if it resigns, a new Ministry is imme-diately formed because the Government cannot be carried on unless thereis a Council of Ministers to 'aid and advise' the British Monarch. It isformally established under the British Constitution that the advice to dissolveby the Prime Minister is absolutely necessary and that at no point of timecan the British Monarch rule the country except in accordance with the 'aidand advice' of the Council of Ministers. Public affairs must be conductedby the Council of Ministers in the name of 'formal head' of State. Therehas been no instance in British constitutional practice since the establish-ment of cabinet system of government under which the Council of Ministersis collectively responsible to the popular chamber, in which the BritishMonarch exercised the executive powers of the Government on his ownwithout any advisers, that is, the Council of Ministers. The point hasbeen thoroughly discussed by Sir Ivor Jennings at various places in hisbook "Cabinet Government."

In this connection a brief reference may be made to the commonly heldview that the Government which continues in office after dissolution is aCaretaker Government, but this popular view is not correct. As IvorJennings has observed in his Book "Cabinet Government" in foot-note (1)on page 86 of Third Edition, —•

"Since this book is used in other Commonwealth countries, it shouldbe explained that it is not British practice to appoint a 'Care-taker Government' for the duration of a general election. Itwas done in 1945 because the wartime coalition had broken-up.The electors had to decide whether they wanted a ConservativeGovernment or a Labour Government, and meanwhile the King'sservice had to be carried on. This was quite exceptional. TheGovernment which advises the dissolution remains in officethroughout the election and continues to do so after the elec-tion, unless it is defeated. A few changes of office may benecessitated by ministers losing their seats, but the Governmentas a whole remains in being unless it is defeated. The mostrecent example is that of 1955, when Sir Anthony Eden'sGovernment remained in office throughout the election."

The next point is that the dissolution of the House of the People,ordered by the President, on the 27th December, 1970, was criticised bythe opposition parties because it came as a surprise, because they did notanticipate such dissolution before the expiration of the full term of theHouse of the People. A snap election is never generally liked by the


opposition but in a parliamentary democracy the party in power does notfail to avail itself of such a snap election if the circumstances prevailingare considered to be in its favour. The opposition parties should do wellto remember that the last year or the last eighteen months of a normalduration of the legislature should be a period of extreme vigilance on theirpart. But it does not seem that the opposition parties exercised the neces-sary vigilance during the period of one year or eighteen months before thedissolution of the Lok Sabha on the 27th December, 1970, although therewere several indications to that effect. It has been stated on good authoritythat the results of the bye-elections during that period should have servedas a signal to the political parties in this respect. "A bye-election result isa coded signal from the voters to the politicians" observed the GuardianWeekly of June 5, 1971, commenting upon the result of some bye-electionsin Great Britain in each of which the Labour candidates defeated theConservative candidates within eleven months after the general electionof June, 1970. In the bye-elections to the House of the People and theState Legislative Assemblies which took place during the one year periodpreceding the dissolution of the House of the People, victory in the majorityof the cases went in favour of the candidates set up by the Congress (R).The following table shows this :—

TABLE ^

Seats won by Parties at the Bye-elections held between 1-1-1970 to 31-12-1970

Name of the House Total No. of Seats won bybye-elections ——

INC INCO BJS CPI BAC BKD JAP DMK SAD KSP 1ND o

• • — , . - _ - |

House of the People . 9 5 . . , . . . 1 1 . . . . . . . . 2 t-1

Legislative Assemblies of 42 20 4 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 8 Sall States. _•

. , , , O

Total: . 5 1 25 4 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 10 ^— — K

, , , , a

INC Indian National Congress. §

INCO Indian National Congress (Organisation) jg

BJS Bharatiya Jana Sangh. O

CPI Communist Party of India. H

BAC Bangla Congress w

BKD Bharatiya Kranti Dal w

JAP Janata Party fSn

DMK Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam.SAD Shiromani Akali Dal.

KSP Kerala Samyukta Socialist Party.

IND Independent.

DISSOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF THE PEOPLF 9

The last of those bye-elections was the Maniram bye-election in Uttar?tadesh. The poll in this bye-election was taken on the 24th January, 1971.The then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Shri T. N. Singh who was andeven now is a sitting member of the Rajya Sabha, sought election to theU.P. Legislative Assembly from 191-Maniram assembly constituency com-prised within 38-Gorakhpur Parliamentary constituency of Uttar Pradesh.Under article 164 (4) of the Constitution of India, — "A Minister whofor any period of six consecutive months is not a member of the Legisla-ture of the State shall at the expiration of that period cease to be aMinister." Shri T. N. Singh was sworn in as the Chief Minister of theSVD Government in Uttar Pradesh on the 15th October, 1970 andtherefore it was natural for him to seek election to the Legislative As-sembly within a period of six months from that date. It seems that thisbye-election was suggested by the State Chief Electoral Officer for thispurpcFc nrd Cio Election Commission also realising the predicament ofthe Chief Minister readily agreed to the suggestion made by the ChiefElectoral Officer of Uttar Pradesh. Having regard to the stature andgeneral popularity of Shri T. N. Singh in Uttar Pradesh, many peoplethought that he would be able to defeat his rival Shri R. K. Dwivedi, thecandidate sponsored by Congress (R), a comparatively unkonwn figure,without much difficulty. But to the surprise of many Shri Dwivedi thrusta crashing defeat on Shri T. N. Singh and won the election in a straightcontest by a majority of over 15,000 votes. This was a great moralbooster to the Congress (R) but it did not open, as it should have opened,the eyes of the various constituent units of the SVD to the approach andattitude, right or wrong, of the electorate, the ultimate masters of thecountry. It does not appear that the results of this as well as of the otherbye-elections, as also of the general election to the Kerala Legislative As-sembly in September, 1970, served as any signal to the opposition partiesfor finding out the cause responsible for the adverse reaction of the elec-torate against them, nor did they appear to have seriously considered thatafter ascertaining the probable cause they should approach the electorateto win their support. The answer is not for the Election Commission togive in this Report. The function of the Commission is simply to drawattention to the strands and trends in the mood and temper of the voterwho is the real figure in the election drama. In this connection what wasstated in "XXIV Parliamentary Affairs", regarding the Kerala election of1970, will not be irrelevant. It was observed at pages 8-9,—

"The outcome was an unexpected success for the Congress Partywhich gained a number of seats while both the Communistparties lost, one of them heavily."

The ruling party on the other hand took full advantage of the resultsof these elections during the period of one year before the dissolution ofthe Lok Sabha. This is done in Great Britain also. Wheneverthe party in power feels that the political circumstances and condi-tions are in its favour, it will at once advise the Head of the Stateto dissolve the legislature. This is the established practice of the partyin power in Great Britain which was followed by Shrimati Gandhi inDecember, 1970, when she advised the President to dissolve the LokSabha. In this connection it will be interesting to quote what has been


stated by John P. Mackintosh in his Book "The British Cabinet" (SecondEdition)— 1968 at pages 208-209,—

"It was in 1900 that the 1878 situation was repeated. TheUnionists were in office and high in public favour for theirconduct of the South African War, with their opponents evi-dently divided. Parliament had two full years of life aheadbut the Cabinet decided to seize this favourable opportunity.As Lord Salisbury told the Queen, the election "would thenonly be on the settlement of South Africa, whereas if it tookplace later on there might be all sorts of difficulties and otherquestions." The Duke of Devonshire put the Cabinet's view inthe form of a simple analogy: "We all know very well thatthe captain of a cricketing eleven, when he wins the toss, putshis own side in, or his adversaries, as he thinks most favour-able to his prospects of winning." It became the normalpractice that, unless there were exceptional situations (forinstance with three fairly evenly balanced parties in theHouse), a ministry could ask for and be granted a dissolutionat any time it chose."

CHAPTER II

ELECTORAL ROLLS AND PREPARATION FOR HOLDING THEGENERAL ELECTION

1. "Not only must a person be entitled to vote in this way but beforebeing permitted to vote as an elector in any constituency mustfirst be registered, that is, the person's name must be on theregister of parliamentary electors to be used at the election."

—A.N. Schofield-Parliamentary Elections, (Third Edition),page 5.

2. "For every constituency there shall be an electoral roll which shallbe prepared in accordance with the provisions of this Act underthe superintendence, direction and control of the ElectionCommission".

—Section 15 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

3. "No person who is not, and except as expressly provided by thisAct, every person who is, for the time being entered in theelectoral roll of any constituency shall be entitled to vote inthat constituency."

—Section 62(1) of the Representation of the People Act,1951.

As soon as the Lok Sabha was dissolved, the Election Commission re-alised that unless preparations for the election were completed quickly onan urgent basis, it would not be possible to hold the elections well in timebefore the end of the financial year, that is to say, the 31st March, 1971, andunless elections could be held and completed by about the middle of March,it would not be possible for the new Lok Sabha to meet in time and passat least a vote-on-account for the purpose of meeting the expenditure forthe purposes and services of the Union for a few months of the new financialyear. A heavy responsibility no doubt devolved upon the Election Com-mission. If the Election Commission would not and could not move quick-ly and expeditiously for that purpose, then that might even bring about aconstitutional deadlock and crisis in the country because in the absence ofthe Lok Sabha there would be no other authority to vote the demands forgrants at least for the first three-four months of the new financial year.

Shortly after the indications became clear that a great split in the IndianNational Congress was certain, the Commission felt that such split in theCongress might force the Prime Minister to advise the President to dissolvethe House of the People at any opportune moment. The Election Com-mission did not, therefore, remain idle even before the dissolution of the LokSabha. As early as a little more than one year before the dissolution, the

11

12 ELECTORAL ROLLS AND PREPARATION FOR HOLDINGTHE GENERAL ELECTION

Election Commission hurriedly called a one-day conference of all the ChiefElectoral Officers of the various States and Union territories on the 5th Nov-ember, 1969 and directed them to take up the revision of electoral rolls onthe 15th November, 1969 and to finish the entire process of revision bythe 15th January, 1970, i.e., just within two months of the commencementof the revision work. This was an unprecedented step in the election historyof India because previously the preparation or revision of the electoral rollstook a very much longer period, some times one year or eighteen months butnever less than six months even in case of summary revision. The Chief Elec-toral Officers were exhorted to take up the job in right earnest with all thehuman resources at their disposal and it definitely went to the credit of theChief Electoral Officers of the States and Union territories and their electionstaff that they were able to finish the work by the target date, namely, the15th January, 1970 in a highly commendable manner, so that the ElectionCommission was in a position towards the end of January, 1970, even aboutone year before the general election, to take up the challenge of holdingelection at a short notice. For this act of the Election Commission, even ques-tions were asked in Parliament as to why the Election Commission, haddirected revision of the electoral rolls at such short notice and had also direct-ed that the revision must be completed within two months. The ElectionCommission had read the writings on the wall and tried to keep itself in astate of perpetual readiness for holding country-wide general election underany contingency.

In Great Britain, elections are held within a very short time after thedissolution of Parliament. By the royal proclamation by which the existingParliament is dissolved, by the very same royal proclamation the new parlia-ment is summoned to meet on a date fixed therein. Within this periodbetween the dissolution of the existing Parliament and the summoning ofthe new Parliament, the general election in Great Britain must be completed.The total time for holding the general election is only seventeen days fromthe date of the issue of the royal proclamation dissolving the existing Par-liament and summoning the new one. Under rule 1 of the Rules forConduct of a Parliamentary Election in England and Wales, in the SecondSchedule to the (U.K.) Representation of the People Act, 1949 (12 & 13Geo. 6*,' Ch.68)—

(a) the writ for the general election is issued, "as soon as practic-able after the issue of the proclamation summoning the newParliament";

(b) the last date for delivery of nomination papers is the "eighth dayafter the date of the proclamation summoning the new Parlia-ment";

(c) the poll is to be taken "on the ninth day after the last date fordelivery of nomination papers".

From the above it will be seen that the general election will be held andcompleted only within 17 days from the date of the issue of the proclama-tion dissolving the existing Parliament and summoning the new one. Ofcourse, in calculating this period of 17 days, a Sunday, the day of the

ELECTORAL ROLLS AND PREPARATION FOR HOLDING 13THE GENERAL ELECTION

Christmas break, or the Easter break, or a bank holiday break or a dayappointed for public thanks-giving or mourning is disregarded. Thus thetotal period for holding and completing a general election in Great Britainis generally 20 or 21 days. For example, in 1970, the Queen dissolvedthe existing Parliament on the 29th May, 1970 on the advice of the PrimeMinister and the poll was held on the 18th June, 1970.

A general election in India cannot obviously be held within such ashort period of 18 or 20 days. In the first place, India is a vast country withan area several times larger than the area of Great Britain, in the secondplace, the electorate of India, namely about 300 millions, is more than sixtimes the electorate of Great Britain and thirdly, in Great Britain there isa good practice among the political parties under which the political partiesalways keep their candidates selected so that the party candidates are in aposition to file their nomination papers within eight days after the dissolu-tion of the existing Parliament. In our country, on the contrary, politicalparties start selecting their candidates only after the dissolution of the LokSabha or a Legislative Assembly or only when they see that the normalduration of the Lok Sabha or of a State Legislative Assembly is going toexpire soon and a general election, therefore, is imminent. If the politicalparties in our country can evolve a practice similar to that followed by thepolitical parties in Great Britain, then in India also, it is now possible to holdand complete a general election within a period of forty days and not morethan that. The Election Commission and the entire election machinerythroughout the country have been attuned to such expeditious work duringthe last five years. But inspite of the handicap posed by the fact that thepolitical parties require at least a month's time to select their candidatesand having also in view the extreme cold climate in the months of Jan-uary and a major part of February, it was possible to hold and completethe election within about 70 days from the date of the dissolution of the LokSabha on the 27th of December, 1970. The first date of the poll wasthe 1st of March, 1971 and the last date of poll which was only in WestBengal was the 10th of March, 1971. To this matter, we shall referwhen we come to the question of the conduct of poll and counting of votes.

As the electoral rolls had already been revised and kept ready, the Com-mission was sanguine that it would be possible to complete the entire elec-tion process in any case by the 13th or 14th of March, 1971. The Com-mission had already asked the Chief Electoral Officers to keep all arrange-ments and materials for general elections ready because even in the normalcircumstances, the general election would come in February-March, 1972.Thus in a circular letter addressed by the Deputy Election Commissioner,Shri P. I. Jacob, on July 16, 1970, to all the Chief Electoral Officers of theStates and Union territories, it was stated as follows:—

"The Chief Election Commissioner has directed me to instruct youthat all the various items of materials required for conductinga General Election to the House of the People and to the StateLegislative Assembly should be kept constantly ready so thatthe Commission would be in a position if it becomes necessary,to hold a general election either to the House of the Peopleor to the State Legislative Assembly, or to both, at short notice,


say, within a period of five weeks after the need arises. Thiscould be achieved only if all the items of materials requiredfor a poll are available with you at any point of time from nowonwards. Even if the General Election is held only early in1972, the time at our disposal is quite short and whatever isdone now will stand in good stead. The matter, therefore,requires your immediate personal attention and the prepara-tions have to be worked out in a systematic manner accordingto a specified time schedule."

With regard to the electoral rolls, it was stated in that letter that—

"The Commission has already asked you by immediate telegram toreport whether you have in stock sufficient number of copies ofthe electoral rolls of all the constituencies for holding a simul-taneous General Election to the House of the People and theState Legislative Assembly. This report is due to be sent byyou not later than the 18th July, 1970 and should be sentpositively within the time limit. The electoral roll may consistof either (i) one integrated roll incorporating the basic rolland all supplements including those prepared in the revision ofthe electoral rolls in 1970, or (ii) one basic roll plus integratedlist of all the supplements upto and including those prepared inthe general revision of 1970. You should report immediatelythe number of copies of each of the two above categories of

: electoral rolls available with you in the following manner, name-ly:

(a) Constituencies 'with more than 50 copies of the electoralroll;

(b) Constituencies with number of copies between 40 and 50;

(c) Constituencies with number of copies between 30 and 40;

(d) Constituencies with number of copies below 30.

If the printing of electoral rolls has not been completed, thework should be expedited to the utmost extent possible andcompleted before 31-8-70."

Then the Chief Electoral Officer were also requested to keep ready the forms,ballot boxes, lists of polling stations, estimate of the requirement of ballotpapers both pink and white which might be necessary, symbol blocks, mark-ing instruments, cloth or canvas bags for wrapping sealed ballot boxes, thinwire for securing the window cover of the ballot box, estimate of requirementsas to indelible ink and stamping pads and intimation in good time for theseto the firms of Mysore Lac and Paint Works Ltd., Mysore, Kores and BharatCarbon and Ribbon Manufacturing Co., New Delhi. But for these timelyprecautionary steps, it would not have been possible to hold the countrywideFifth General Election to Parliament within a period of about two monthsafter the date of dissolution of the Lok Sabha. Another one-day conference


of Chief Electoral Officers was held on the 4th January 1971, i.e., about aweek after the dissolution of the Lok Sabha, to review the entire situationregarding arrangements and to have a general and overall view of the wholematter.

We have already pointed out that in view of fluid and unstable poli-tical situation in the country, the Election Commission had already kept theelectoral rolls ready to meet any contingency that might necessitate a generalelection to the Lok Sabha. These electoral rolls were revised by reference tothe 1st of January, 1970. Therefore, when the Lok Sabha was dissolvedtowards the end of December, 1970, the Election Commission felt confidentthat it would be possible to hold the general election well in time before thefinancial year was out. It may be pointed out here that whenever a generalelection is held, either to the Lok Sabha or to a Legislative Assemblyduring the first quarter of a year, then the electoral rolls which can beused for such election can only be the rolls prepared or revised byreference to the 1st of January of the preceding year because it isphysically impossible to hold and complete any general election bythe middle of March of a year by preparing or revising the electoralrolls by reference to the 1st of January of that very year. Therefore, in ourelection history as the general elections have by and large been held in thefirst quarter of the year, the rolls which have been used for such general elec-tions have always been the rolls prepared or revised by reference to the 1stof January of the previous year. This time also, the rolls in force at thetime of the general election in February-March, 1971 were the rolls which, asalready pointed out, were prepared by reference to the 1st of January 1970,but as soon as the. Lok Sabha was dissolved and a general election becameimminent, representations started coming in from political parties and othersfor inclusion of names in the electoral rolls under section 23 of the Repre-sentation of the People Act, 1950. Under that section any person who isnot included in the electoral roll of a constituency may apply to the Elec-toral Registration Officer for the inclusion of his name in that roll, and theElectoral Registration Officer, if satisfied that the applicant is entitled tobe registered in the electoral rolls, is required by the law to direct his nameto be included therein. But sub-section (3) of that section sets a time limitfor such inclusion. Under that sub-section no direction for the inclusionof a name in the electoral roll of a constituency can be given after the lastdate for making nominations for an election in that constituency, with theresult that even if an application for inclusion is made before the last datefor making nominations, if the necessary inquiry as to the eligibility of theapplicant and the formalities in connection therewith cannot be completedby the Electoral Registration Officer in time for the purpose of inclusion ofthe name before the last date for making nominations, then in that case theapplication for inclusion will remain undisposed of till the elections areheld and completed.

But every opportunity was given by the Election Commission by issuingdirections to all the Electoral Registration Officers throughout the countryto entertain as many applications for inclusion as possible and to disposethem of and make orders for inclusion in the electoral rolls in as many casesas possible before the last date for filing nomination papers. Thus on the

•J


14th January, 1971, a Press Note was issued by the Election Commissionby which wide publicity was given to its directions to the Electoral Regis-tration Officers in this respect. The Press Note was as follows :

"ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Talkatora Road.New Delhi-1.

PRESS NOTE

Representations have been, and are being received from politicalparties and others for the extension of the period for filing ap-plications to the electoral registration officer of the concernedconstituencies for inclusion of names in the electoral rolls of suchconstituencies. Section 23(3) of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1950 provides inter alia that "no direction for theinclusion of a name in the electoral roll of a constituency shallbe given after the last date for making nominations for an elec-tion." Rule 26(3) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960requires inter alia that a period of seven days must be given forfiling objections to any such application for inclusion. Onlyafter the expiry of the aforesaid period of seven days the elec-toral registration officer, if satisfied that the applicant is entitledto have his name registered in the roll, shall direct the applicant'sname to be included in the electoral roll. In view of these man-datory statutory requirements and also in view of a SupremeCourt judgement delivered in 1969, the Commission thoughtit proper that the last date for filing applications for inclusionof names should be the 15th of January, 1971.

"The Commission has very carefully considered the whole matterover again in view of the large number of representations whichhave been received for extension of time. Although thereis no legal objection to file any application for inclusion at anytime, the Commission apprehends that in view of the forthcom-ing general elections if may be extremely difficult for the electoralregistration officers, all of whom will be busy in connection withimportant election work and most of whom will function as re-turning officers or assistant returning officers, to complete theinquiries in connection with all applications for inclusions anddirect inclusion of names in the electoral rolls concerned beforethe last date for filing nominations.

"Upon all these considerations, the Commission has decided to directthe electoral registration officers to make every effort to disposeof all applications for inclusion even if such applications arereceived upto 5 p.m. of the 18th January, 1971. It is madeabsolutely clear that it may not be possible to dispose of theapplications received after that time by the last date for filing


nominations. Such applications will of course be kept over fordisposal after the forthcoming general elections are over.

New Delhi-1.Dated the 14th January, 1971."

As the last dates for making nominations were according to the election prog-ramme on different days, the applications for inclusion were accepted by thethe registration officers for disposal on different dates in different States. Insome States, applications for inclusion were accepted by the registration offi-cers even after the end of January, 1971 because the last date for makingnominations in those States fell on later dates. Under rule 26 of the Regis-tration of Electors Rules, 1960, the registration officer is required to give atleast 7 days time for filing objections to applications for inclusions. Sub-rule(3) of rale 26 specifically lays down that the registration officer shall, imme-diately, on the receipt of an application for inclusion, direct that one copythereof be posted in some conspicuous place in his office together with anotice inviting objections to such application within a period of seven daysfrom the date of such posting. It is only after the expiration of that periodof seven days, that, the electoral registration officer can consider the objec-tions, if any, received by him and only thereafter he can, if satisfied aboutthe validity of the claim of the applicant, direct his name to be included inthe electoral roll. Thus from this it will appear that if the 10th day of amonth is the last date for making nominations, then applications for inclu-sion must reach the electoral registration officer in any case on the 2nd or3rd day of the month and never beyond that. Applications made after thatdate will be kept pending for disposal after the elections are over.

With all these facilities given to the members of the public and the poli-tical parties, a large number of names were included in the electoral rollsthroughout the country even after the commencement of the programme ofthe election.

It may be mentioned here that inspite of the best efforts of the ElectionCommission and the election machinery in the States at various levels, thepossibility of wrong omissions or inclusions of some names from or in theelectoral rolls cannot altogether be ruled out in view of the vast area and thevast electorate of this country. The total number of electorate is in theneighbourhood of 300 millions which is bigger than the population of anycountry in the world except the People's Republic of China.

Then, the persons who are eligible for registration of their names as votersin the electoral rolls have also got a duty in this respect. Article 326 nodoubt gives them a right to be registered as voters but unless they are vigilantm this respect and take care to see that their names have been actually in-cluded in the electoral rolls, then, because of human errors or shortcomingstheir names may not actually find a place therein. Many years ago, ViscountBryce said that indolence was one of the greatest hindrances to good citizen-ship. Unless, therefore, our citizens cast off their apathy and indolence, theycannot always be sure that their names have been included in the electoralrolls inspite of the best efforts of those charged with the preparation andrevision of the electoral rolls.


In the next place, attention of the political parties and members of thepublic may be drawn to another factor. It has been found from experiencethat on the eve of every general election to the House of the People or to aState Legislative Assembly, applications for inclusion of names arc madebefore the concerned electoral registration officers not only in hundreds butquite often in thousands and sometimes tens and hundreds of thousands, withthe result that it becomes simply physically impossible for any election offi-cer to cope with the unmanageable task of inclusion of names of such largenumber of persons in the electoral rolls after making a thorough inquiry as tothe correctness or otherwise of the respective claims. The political partiesand the members of the public therefore should do well if they check the elec-toral rolls in good time after their final publication. Wide publicity is givenwhenever any electoral roll is finally published and widest possible publicityis given when any electoral roll is in the process of preparation or revision,that is to say, is in the preliminary or draft stage. If the political partiesand the members of the public avail themselves of these opportunities givenat several stages, then there cannot be many wrongful omissions or wrong-ful inclusions of names from or in the electoral rolls.

If the proposals of the Election Commission regarding a number ofqualifying dates instead of one as at present and regarding the constant re-vision of the electoral rolls by maintaining them always upto-date, are ac-cepted by Parliament, then many of the complaints regarding wrongful omis-sions or wrongful inclusions of names will disappear. It is noted with satis-faction that these recommendations of the Election Commission have been ac-cepted practically in toto by the Joint Committee of the Houses of Parliamenton amendments to Election Law in their Report. The sooner these amend-ments are put on the statute book, the better for all concerned. There isno doubt about it because in such a case even a person who completes theage of 21 years even a few days before an election will be able to have hisname registered in the electoral roll and it will be possible for the electionmachinery to cut out from the electoral rolls the names which were wronglyincluded in the electoral rolls.

CHAPTER IIIADULT FRANCHISE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS : A LESSON AND

A WARNING

1. "The people are therefore the real directing power; and althoughthe form of government is representative, it is evident that theopinions, the prejudices, the interests, and even the passions ofthe people are hindered by no permanent obstacles from exercis-ing a perpetual influence on the daily conduct of affairs. In theUnited States the majority governs in the name of the people, asis the case in all countries in which the people are supreme. Thismajority is principally composed of peaceable citizens, who,either by inclination or by interest, sincerely wish the welfare oftheir country. But they are surrounded by the incessant agitationof parties who attempt to gain their co-operation and support."

—Alexis De Tocqueville—Democracy In America, Volume I, Chap-ter IX, page 196 (Popular Prakashan Edition, 1964).

2. "We now come to the Chartists, the politically active portion ofthe British working class. The six points of the Charter which theycontend for contain nothing but the demand of Universal Suffrage,and of the conditions without which Universal Suffrage would beillusory for the working class; such as the ballot, payment of mem-bers, annual general elections. But Universal Suffrage is theequivalent of political power for the working class of England,where the proletariat forms the large majority of the population,where, in a long, though underground civil war, it has gained aclear consciousness of its position as a class, and where even therural districts know no longer any peasants, but only landlords,industrial capitalists (farmers) and hired labourers. The carry-ing of Universal Suffrage in England would, therefore, be a farmore socialistic measure than anything which has been honouredwith that name on the Continent.

Its inevitable result, here, is the political supremacy of the workingclass."

—Karl Marx in New York Daily Tribune of August 25, 1852,quoted in the book 'Karl Marx : Economy, Class and SocialRevolution' edited by Z. A. Jordan, (1971), page 276.

3. "Every day you have kept away at a distance the touch of manand thereby despised the Lord who dwells in the heart."

—Tagore.4. "I am the Rebel : And though tired of fighting, I shall stop

Only when the wailings of the oppressedWill not fill the air and rend the sky."

—Rebel Poet Kazi Nazrul Islam.

•19

20 ADULT FRANCHISE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS : A LESSON ANDA WARNING

5. "A new economic order presupposes a change in the substance oflegal imperatives; it forces them to attempt response to widerdemands: lest they cease to be legal imperatives. The neweconomic order means universal suffrage; universal suffrage meansthe conquest by the multitude of the power to operate politicalinstitutions. They are bound to use that power so to operate1

them as to make them responsive to needs not so far met bythe habits of the State."

—Harold Laski, "Introduction to Politics", page 44.

By adult franchise, the Indian citizen has found himself and redis-covered himself. He has realized fully that he has become the repositoryof a mighty force which can make or unmake governments and whichtherefore no politician or political party can afford to ignore. He knowsthat politicians and political parties always try to placate him and to weanhim to their views by even means and methods which may not alwaysappear proper and fair. No politician, however, conservative he may bein his basic approach and attitude towards political objects and ideals andpolicies or in regard to the norms and values of life and conduct of manas a member of society and political community or however self-conceitedhe may be, can dare to bypass the citizen today because he is a voter whoknows well that at least at the time of election he will be in a position towield his power in favour of the parties and persons who have due regardfor his personality and dignity. This reawakening of the individual seemsto be the direct result of adult suffrage in election in this country. Theword 'reawakening' has been purposely used because since time immemorialwhere history of man runneth not, the culture and philosophy of thiscountry have regarded every man or woman or for the matter of thatevery created being, as the manifestation of the Supreme Absolute. Butunder the dead weight of reasonless and soulless habits, customs and tradi-tions, man forgot himself. Adult franchise has enabled him to recognisehis real self and re-assert himself as a vocal member of the body politic.Anybody who has got an opportunity to mix with the people by comingdown on the same level as theirs will readily recognise the truth of whathas been stated above. Therefore, when a handful of unthinking andfrustrated politicians try to explain away the result of any election by puttingforward all sorts of fantastic, absurd and mischievous theories, they notonly insult the Indian citizen, the voter, but also the true philosophy andculture of this Great Land, however, they may profess to be the followersof such philosophy and culture.

We have not yet realised the full implications, political, social andeconomic, of adult franchise. Adult franchise is a mighty force, which issweeping away, whether some of us like it or not, all blocks and barriersof blind traditions and customs as well as casteism, communalism, religiousfanaticism, untouchability each of which sometimes even masquerades inthe garb of religion. Those who are supporters of these baneful customsand traditions forget that in a democracy based on adult suffrage theseblack things have no place or function. Politically every adult citizentoday is a voter with only one vote and no more than one, whether he is

ADULT FRANCHISE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS : A LESSON AND 21A WARNING

a Brahmin, or a non-Brahmin, or a Hindu or a Muslim or a Sikh or aChristian, etc. or from whatever part or region of the country he may come.Adult franchise is thus socially and politically the great leveller. As atthe end of life death is the great leveller, so" in life adult franchise is thegreat leveller. Before it all are absolutely equal. There cannot be anydifference between a voter and a voter on the ground of any religious,social, economic or political barrier. In the queue before the pollingstation all citizens go by the common name, namely, voters. Those whohave eyes to see can easily see that adult franchise has reinstated the freespirit of man in its rightful place in this country.

But very few people have realized the much more important implica-tions of adult franchise, namely, its economic implications. Its economicimplications were first seen by Karl Marx more than a century ago. About40 years ago, Ernest Barker said in his book "The Citizens' Choice"(Chapter II—The Breakdown of Democracy) —

"It (that is, democracy) is a principle of the action of the humanspirit—the principle that free spirits, in the area of social andpolitical as well as of individual life, should freely guide them-selves to freely determined issues. It is also a system of institu-tions, operative in a political community, which enables thisprinciple to be realized and serves as the means of its realiza-tion."

Adult franchise is, par excellence, the best institution of democracy whichtends to bring about not only social and political equality and liberty ofthe citizen by removing shackles and barriers of caste, creed, communityand religion, but also his economic sufficiency and freedom.

Speaking generally, it may be said without much fear of contradictionthat from ancient times till about the eighties of the last century privatecharity was the only institution for ameliorating the conditions of the poor.Since then however some high souled geniuses and true friends of mankindwho were shocked by the injustice of the prevalent social and economicsystems functioning and flourishing under the protection of outmoded andcenturies old legal institutions, were able to invent two powerful social andeconomic orders to cut at the very root of poverty. These are(1) socialism and (2) adult franchise. Here in this report on electionsmy principal concern is however with adult franchise.

The days are gone in which man might remain content with the idealof civil and religious liberty or of political liberty and free voting right.Adult franchise has opened to the people a new vision of their economicfreedom which is still to be won and which will free every citizen fromthe effects of brutalizing poverty and its concomitants, such as hunger,disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. Adult franchise has created inthe voter the conviction that poverty is an economic phenomenon which

3EC/72—3


can be banished and removed from our midst by the organised efforts ofthe community. Gone are the days of laissez faire according to which —

(a) poverty is an inevitable condition of human life;

(b) man's mundane condition is, by and large, the reflection of hisown moral character; and

(c) private voluntary charity is the proper source of relief for thelegitimate needs of the 'poor'.

Perhaps having regard to these tenets of laissez faire, Sri Aurobindo oncesaid—"There are philanthropists wh>o would be troubled if the poor werenot always with us for they would then have no field for their charity".But it is adult franchise which has ushered in new standards of the positiveor welfare state and socialism. According to the standards of this newState, poverty is an 'economic' phenomenon that can, must and should beabolished; the State is the sole social institution capable of dealing withthe economic affairs which give rise to that phenomenon; and hence thechief responsibility for abolishing poverty rests upon the State and theStat6 must, in turn, exert its faculties towards that end. These principleswhich today appear to us to be evident did not so appear to the classicaland traditional political economists, like Adam Smith, Ricardo, Malthus oreven John Stuart Mill. These classical and traditional political economistsfollowing the traditions of the Reformation preached that the virtues oftemperance, sexual restraint, diligence and thrift should be practised by thepoor. The new economists headed by Alfred Marshall while giving veryhigh value to these individual moral virtues, began to realise that thesevirtues however noble, high and edifying they might be, were not adequateto improve the lot of the poor masses, specially in the conditions broughtabout by the Industrial Revolution and modern Industrialism by abolishingpoverty and its problems. Thus in his inaugural lecture entitled 'thePresent Position of Economics' after his election to the Professorship atCambridge in 1885, Alfred Marshall said—

"The chief fault, then, in English economists at the beginning ofthe century was not that they ignored history and statistics;but that Ricardo and his followers neglected a large group offacts, and a method of studying facts which we now see to beof primary importance."

"They regarded man as, so to speak, a constant quantity, and gavethemselves little trouble to study his variations. The peoplewhom they knew were chiefly city men; and they took it forgranted tacitly that other Englishmen were very much likethose they knew in the city. They were aware that the inhabi-tants of other countries had pecularities of their own; but theyregarded such differences, when they thought of them at all,as superficial and sure to be removed as soon as other nationshad got to know that better way which Englishmen were readyto teach them. The same bent of mind, that led our lawyers


to impose English civil law on the Hindoos, led our economiststo work out their theories on the tacit supposition that theworld was made up of city men."

"This did little harm so long as they treated of money and foreigntrade, but great harm when they treated of the relations betweenthe different industrial classes. It led them to regard laboursimply as a commodity without throwing themselves into thepoint of view of the workman; without allowing for his humanpassions, his instincts and habits, his sympathies and antipathies,his class jealousies and class adhesiveness, his want of know-ledge and of the opportunities for free and vigorous action.They therefore attributed to the forces of supply and demanda much more mechanical and regular action than they actuallyhave; and laid down laws with regard to profits and wagesthat did not really hold even for England in their own time."

"But their most vital fault was that they did not see how liable tochange are the habits and institutions of industry. In particularthey did not see that the poverty of the poor is the chief causeof that weakness and inefficiency which are the cause of theirpoverty : they had not the faith, that modern economists have,in the possibility of a vast improvement in the condition of theworking classes .• It istherefore not a matter for wonder that the economists, flushedwith their victories over a set of much more solid thinkers, didnot trouble themselves to examine any of the doctrines of thesocialists, and least of all their speculations as to humannature."

"But the socialists were men who felt intensely, and who knewsomething about the hidden springs of human action of whichthe economists took no account. Buried among their wildrhapsodies there were shrewd observations and pregnantsuggestions from which philosophers and economists had muchto learn. And gradually their influence began to tell. Comte'sdebts to them were very great; and the crisis of John StuartMill's life, as he tells us in his autobiography, came to himfrom reading them." (Italics mine).

—See Memorials of Alfred Marshall edited by A.C. Pigou—1956Edition, pages 154—56.

And five years later, that is in 1890, in the first edition of his famous book"Principles of Economics", Alfred Marshall said about the poor at page2 —

"But the conditions which surround extreme poverty, especially indensely crowded places tend to deaden the higher faculties.Those "who have been called the Residuum of our large townshave little opportunity for friendship; they know nothing of


the decencies and the quiet, and very little even of the unityof family life; and religion often fails to reach them. No doubttheir physical, mental, and moral ill-health is partly due toother causes than poverty : but this is the chief cause."

"And, in addition to the Residuum, there are vast numbers of peopleboth in town and country who are brought up with insufficientfood, clothing, and house-room; whose education is broken

. off early in order that they may go to work for wages; whothenceforth are engaged during long hours in exhausting toilwith imperfectly nourished bodies, and have therefore no chanceof developing their higher mental faculties. Their life is notnecessarily unhealthy or unhappy. Rejoicing in their affectionstowards God and man, and perhaps even possessing somenatural refinement of feeling, they may lead lives that are farless incomplete than those of many, who have more materialwealth. But, for all that, their poverty is a great and almostunmixed evil to them. Even when they are well, their weari-ness often amounts to pain, while their pleasures are few; andwhen sickness comes, the suffering caused by poverty increasestenfold. And, though a contented spirit may go far towardsreconciling them to these evils, there are others to which itought not to reconcile them. Overworked and undertaught,weary and careworn, without quite and without leisure, theyhave no chance of making the best of their mental faculties."

"Although then some of the evils which commonly go with povertyare not its necessary consequences; yet, broadly speaking,"the destruction of the poor is their poverty," and the study ofthe causes of poverty is a study of the causes of the degradationof a large part of mankind." (Italics mine)

And these words have been repeated in every subsequent edition of thatbook.

Thus we see that the effect of the scientific outlook of the new econo-mists beginning with Alfred Marshall was to reduce to a good deal ofirrelevance the four cardinal virtues that were so important to classical andtraditional political economy, namely, virtues of temperance, sexual res-traint, diligence and thrift. These virtues were no doubt highly laudablebut they were inadequate to meet the baneful conditions thrown up bythe Industrial Revolution and modern Industrialism. They realised, and itis now realised almost universally, that poverty was an economic and nota moral problem. It is exactly for this reason that the framers of ourConstitution laid down certain very important principles of policy to befollowed by the State in article 39 of the Constitution of India which readsas follows :

"39. The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards secur-ing—

(a) that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right toan adequate means of livelihood;


(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources ofthe community are so distributed as best to subserve thecommon good';

(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result inthe concentration of wealth and means of production to thecommon detriment;

(d) that there is equal pay for equal work for both men andwomen ;

(e) that the health and strength of workers, men and women,and the tender age of children are not abused and thatcitizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avoca-tions unsuited to their age or strength;

(f) that childhood and youth are protected against exploitationand against moral and material abandonment,"

But in spite of the realisation that poverty is an economic phenomenon tobe tackled on an economic and political basis, the powers of the Stateeven in Great Britain were not able to abolish poverty and to cope with itsbaneful effects. Only after the introduction of full adult franchise in GreatBritain in 1918 and 1928, the efforts of the State gradually began to showresults and today not only in Great Britain but almost in every country ofEurope where adult suffrage is in vogue poverty has practically beenabolished. With the abolition of poverty the real function of the fourcardinal virtues mentioned earlier seems to have arrived. In this countryalso adult franchise has started producing results. The people have realisedthat the powers of the State will have to be so exercised as to bring to anend their miserable conditions engendered by poverty. Therefore, theyhave started giving opportunities to the political parties according to theirpromises and programme. If they find that the party whom they votedto power has not been and is not able to ameliorate their conditions, thenperhaps at a future election they may not hesitate to turn their back to thatpolitical party and try some other political party. This is a lesson whichevery right thinking politician and every sound and well organised politicalparty having any respect for dignity of man should try to take from adultfranchise and if the political parties fail to bring to the people, the povertystricken electorate of this country, an end of their poverty, then the fearis that these ultimate holders of power will not hesitate to assert themselvesnot through the ballot box but through the bullet and the bayonet. Adultfranchise should therefore be a lesson and a warning : it should be a hopeas well as a challenge. This is why, Prof. Laski said—

"A new economic order presupposes a change in the substance oflegal imperatives; it forces them to attempt response to widerdemands lest they cease to be legal imperatives. The neweconomic order means universal suffrage; universal suffragemeans the conquest by the multitude of the power to operatepolitical institutions. They are bound to use that power so tooperate them as to make them responsive to the needs not so


far met by the habits of the State. Their authority makesthings seem a natural part of justice which, even a generationago, would have been deemed impracticable by statesmen.They impose upon society conditions favourable to their ownpreponderance in exactly the same way as their predecessors.Law, morality, religion, move in terms of the new rhythm oflife just as they have done when other classes attain to power.They elevate the conceptions of which they have need intothe same objects of veneration that other conceptions havehad in previous social systems. For a class which dominatesa State does not merely ask for power to exploit those whomit dispossesses; it demands, as in Soviet Russia to-day, thatits exploitation should be equated with right, that its veryvictims should recognise the justice of the principles uponwhich they lose their privileges. So, in the past, society regard-ed an attack on property as the highest sin; and it was preparedto regard as honourable the man who left his wife and childrenhungry rather than injure the possessions of his neighbour."

—Harold J. Laski—An Introduction to Politics—pages 44-45.

The General Elections to the Lok Sabha in 1971 and to the variousLegislative Assemblies in 1972, have clearly shown that the people of thiscountry have awoken, after about a quarter of a century since Independence,from their deep slumber and they have started to assert their valued rightsfor the object of ameliorating of their economic conditions. They haverealised that they go to the polling station not simply to put a mark onsome piece of paper but that they are doing so in the hope and belief thatthose for whom they are putting the mark, will do something to alleviatethe pains and pangs of their poverty. And they will not hesitate at thenext opportunity to give their mark for other persons and parties if thosefor whom they have given their mark earlier have not even to some minimumextent endeavoured to fulfil their promises. If adult suffrage fails, violenceis sure to come and no one will be able to stop it. This is the warning ofadult franchise which everybody should take heed of. And if and whenthat dire and terrible event comes, no fantastic and mischievous theory ofrigging elections will be of any avail to any body.

CHAPTER IV

WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION

1. "Had I succeeded I should have used my utmost endeavours tohave acted upto the great Trust reposed in me. I should haveconsidered a seat in Parliament—neither as a Title of Honour,nor an instrument of profit, but as a laborious and importantduty, to which the greatest parts joined to the severest applicationare scarcely equal. I should have endeavoured to follow thepath of moderation and impartiality, Loyal to my King withoutservility, Zealous for my Country without Faction; and attachedto the general welfare of Great Britain, but not unattentive tothe particular interests of the Borough, I had the Honour to re-present."

—From Edward Gibbon's First Election Speech on the Day ofElection for the Borough of Peters field in the year 1761.

2. " , being elected to the great high council and supremepublic court of parliament,—a trust, the most important, both inits nature and consequences, that can be conferred by subjectsupon a fellow citizen in a free country."

— Whitelock on the King's Writ for choosing members ofParliament, 1766, 459.

On the dissolution of the Lok Sabha on the 27th December, 1970,the holding of a general election for constituting a new Lok Sabha be-came an absolute legal imperative. The Constitution of India in article79 says—

"There shall be a Parliament for the Union which shall consist ofthe President and two Houses to be known respectively asthe Council of States and the House of the People."

This means that at every point of time there must be a Parliament inexistence; and a Parliament can be in existence if and only if all the threeconstituent units thereof, namely, the President, the Council of States andthe House of the People continue to exist. When, therefore, the Houseof the People is dissolved, the House continues to exist through theSpeaker of the House of the People. This is no doubt a fiction, but stillfor maintaining the unbroken continuity of Parliament, the framers of ourConstitution following the British practice provided that in spite of thedissolution of the House, the Speaker shall not vacate his office untilimmediately before the first meeting of the House of the People after dis-solution. This is laid down in the second proviso to article 94 of theConstitution which runs as follows :—

"Provided further that, whenever the House of the People is dis-solved, the Speaker shall not vacate his office until immediately

27

28 WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION

before the first meeting of the House of the People after dis-solution."

This fiction is also present in British constitutional practice. But for contin-uity of Parliament, there is another fiction in Great Britain. It is this, namely,that the Royal proclamation by which the existing Parliament is dissolved,by the very same Royal proclamation, the new Parliament is summoned tomeet at a particular place and on a particular date menioned in that pro-clamation. As stated in May's 'Parliamentary Practice'—

"This period (the period between the dissolution of the existingParliament and the first meeting of the new Parliament), ofcourse, contains an interregnum between the dissolution of aParliament and the meeting of its successor during which thereis no Parliament in existence; but the principle of the unbrokencontinuity of Parliament is for all practical purposes securedby the fact that the same proclamation which dissolves a Par-liament provides for the election and meeting of a new Parlia-ment." .:

— Eighteenth Edition, page 254.

The case of a State Legislative Assembly is almost the same. But thereis a little difference. In the case of a State Legislative Assembly there maybe a contingency in which it may not be in continuous existence whetherin reality or as a matter of fiction for a time during which a State is underPresident's Rule under article 356 of the Constitution. But in the case ofParliament there is no provision in the Constitution corresponding to article356.

As the Election Commission was ready for holding the election toconstitute a new Parliament, the Election Commission could have recom-mended to the President under section 14(2) of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1951, to issue writ notification or notifications calling thegeneral election even in the first week or the first ten days of January,1971. But two considerations prevented the Commission from taking thisstep. First of all, the Commission felt that the various political partieswould not be able to select their candidates within a short period of 12or 14 days after the dissolution of Parliament. Secondly, the weather con-ditions in the whole month of January and practically the whole month ofFebruary would make it extremely difficult for all concerned to take part inthe elections during these two months practically in all the States and Unionterritories north of Vindhya Hills. Therefore, the Commission decided tomake its recommendation to the President for the issue of the writs undersection 14 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 only in the lastweek of January and the first week of February, 1971.

After careful consideration of the whole matter the Commissiondecided that it should recommend to the President of India three differentdates for the issue of the writ notifications calling upon all the Parlia-mentary constituencies throughout the country to elect members for the

WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION 29

purpose of constituting a new House of the People. These three differentdates were the 27th January, 1971, the 1st February, 1971 and the 3rdFebruary, 1971.

The writ notification under section 14(2) of the Representation ofthe People Act, 1951, was issued on the 27th January, 1971, in respectof the following States and Union territories, namely,

1. Assam2. Bihar3. Gujarat4. Himachal Pradesh5. Kerala6. Madhya Pradesh7. Maharashtra8. Nagaland9. Rajasthan

10. Tamil Nadu11. Uttar Pradesh12. Andaman & Nicobar Islands13. Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands14. Manipur

The writ notification was issued on the 1st February, 1971, in respectof the following States and Union territories, namely;

1. Andhra Pradesh2. Haryana3. Jammu & Kashmir4. Mysore5. Orissa6. Punjab7. Chandigarh8. Dadra & Nagar Haveli9. Delhi

10. Goa, Daman and Diu11. Pondicherry

The writ notification in respect of the State of West Bengal and theUnion territory of Tripura was issued on the 3rd February, 1971.

Before that, on the 17th January, 1971, the Chief Election Commis-sioner himself personally handed over a letter with a copy of the Proceed-ings to the President recommending the issue of the writ notifications on


the aforesaid dates. That letter and the Proceedings were as follows :—

D.O. No. 464/71"S. P. Sen-Varma Chief Election Commissioner of India

New Delhi-1.January 17, 1971.

Respected Rashtrapati Ji,

I have the honour to bring personally to you the Proceedings in rela-tion to the notifications to be issued under your orders whereby you maybe pleased to call upon all the parliamentary constituencies in the countryto elect members in accordance with the provisions of the Representationof the People Act, 1951, and the rules and orders made thereunder.

The Proceedings and the draft notification for publication in theOfficial Gazette will be formally sent to the Government of India in theMinistry of Law in the course of today.

With personal respects and affection.

Yours sincerely,Sd/- S. P. Sen-Varma

Shri V. V. Giri,President of India,Rashtrapati Bhavan,New Delhi.

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

New Delhi,Dated the 17th January, 1971.

PROCEEDINGS

Whereas the House of the People was dissolved by the President undersub-clause (b) of clause (2) of article 85 of the Constitution on the 27thDecember, 1970;

And whereas a general election has to be held for the purpose ofconstituting a new House;

Now, therefore, in pursuance of sub-section (2) of section 14 of theRepresentation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), the Election Com-mission of India hereby recommends each of the dates specified in column2 of the Table below as the date on which may be published in the Gazetteof India a notification by which the President may be pleased to call upon,as required by sub-section (2) of the said section 14, all the parliamentaryconstituencies comprised within the States and Union territories specifiedin column 1 of that Table against the date in column 2 thereof, to elect

WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION 31

members in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, and the rulesand orders made thereunder :—

TABLE

N a m e of S ta te /Union terr i tory

D a t e of p u b l i -ca t i on in theGaze t te ofI n d i a of n o t i -f icat ion u /s 14(2) of the R e -presenta t ion ofthe People Ac t

1951

1

1. Assam2. Bihar3. Gujarat4 . H imacha l Pradesh . . . .5. Kerala6. M a d h y a Pradesh . . . .7. Maharash t ra . . . . .8. Naga land9. Rajas than

10. Tami l N a d u11. U t t a r Pradesh .12. A n d a m a n & N i c o b a r Is lands13. Laccadive, Minicoy and Amind iv i Is lands14. M a n i p u r . . . . . .15. A n d h r a Pradesh . . . .16. Ha ryana17. J a m m u and K a s h m i r . . . .18. Mysore . . . . . .19. Orissa20. Punjab2 1 . Chandigarh22. D a d r a and Nagar Havel i2 3 . Delhi24. G o a , D a m a n and D i u . . . .25 . Pondicherry26. West Bengal27. Tripura

27-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-7127-1-71

1-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-711-2-713-2-713-2-71

By order.

A. N. SEN,Secretary.

3 2 WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION

On the very same day the Proceedings with three draft writ notifica-tions were sent by the Secretary of the Commission to the Government ofIndia in the Ministry of Law, Legislative Department, for necessary action.

The programme notifications under section 30 of the Representationof the People Act, 1951, were issued by the Election Commission simul-taneously, that is to say, the programme notifications in respect of the Statesand Union territories for which the writ notifications had been issued bythe President on the 27th January, 1971, were issued by the Commissionon that date; the programme notifications in respect of the States and Unionterritories for which the writ notifications had been issued on the1st February, 1971, were issued on that date; and the programme notifica-tions in respect of West Bengal and Tripura for which the writ notifica-tions were issued on the 3rd February, 1971, were issued on that verydate. The following Table shows at a glance the various dates for theseveral stages of the election process :—

Statement showing programme for General Election to Lok Sabha—1971

Name of State/ Date of Issue Last date Date for Last date for Date or Dates Date of Hours of pollUnion territory of notification for making scrutiny of withdrawal of poll completion ^

nominations nominations of Candida- gjtures 5a

— " ' >1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 §

• t

1. Assam . . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. g(Wednesday) (Wednesday) (Thursday) (Saturday) (Monday) jd

4-3-71 |(Thursday) g

2. Bihar . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 8-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 7 . 3 0 A.M. to 4.30 P.M. ™(Monday) (Monday) o

3-3-71 »(Wednesday) j5-3-71 3 ,

(Friday) W

3. Gujarat . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. 8(Saturday) (Monday) 2

4-3-71 S(Thursday) >;

4. Himachal Pradesh . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 2-3-71 *15-6-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. W(Tuesday) - £5-3-71 g(Friday) | j*16-5-71 O(Sunday) z

*Vide Commission's notification No. 464/HP/HP/71(2) dated 16th February, 1971, date of poll in 1-Kinnaur, 49-Lahaul-Spiti assemblyconstituencies and areas of Pangi tahsil and Bharmour sub-tahsil of Chamba district comprised within 2-Mandi parliamentary consti-tuency was changed from 2nd March, 1971 to 16th May, 1971. &

— K1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

5. Kerala . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 6-3-71 15-3-71 7 A.M. to 5 P.M.(Saturday) <S**9-3-71 £(Tuesday) H

6. Madhya Pradesh . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. M

(Monday) fe4-3-71 O(Thursday) ^

7. Maharashtra . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. g(Monday) o4-3-71 W(Thursday) 66-3-71 g(Saturday) w

8. Nagaland . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. W

(Monday) 22-3-71 g

(Tuesday)3-3-71 S(Wednesday) w4-3-71 a(Thursday) M5-3-71 g(Friday) ja6-3-71 >(Saturday)

9. Rajasthan . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. "(Monday) w4-3-71 Q(Thursday) 56-3-71 2!(Saturday)

**Vide notification S.O. No. 927 dated 23rd February, 1971.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

10. Tamil Nadu < . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 8-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. ^(Monday) (Monday) S;

4-3-71 ~(Thursday) a>

7-3-71 >(Sunday) Z

11. Uttar Pradssh . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. °(Saturday) (Monday) i-d

3-3-71 g(Wednesday) o

5-3-71 »(Friday) S

12. Andaman aad Nicobar 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 7 A.M. to 4 P.M. 5Islands. (Monday) a

13. Lascadiye, Minicoy 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 7 A.M. to 4 P.M. <*>and Anindivi Islands (Monday) >n

1 4 . Minipur . . . 27-1-71 3-2-71 4-2-71 6-2-71 1-3-71 15-3-71 7.30A.M.to4.30P.M. g(Monday) ^

4-3-71 H(Thursday) «

(Sunday) g15. 4-iIi-i Pradssh . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to . 5 PM. §

(Manday) (Monday) (Tuesday) (Thursday) (Friday) w16. Haryana . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. £

(Friday) r17. Jamni aai Kashmir . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 4-3-71 *15-6-71 9 A.M. to 5 P.M. W

(Thursday) £6-3-71 g

(Saturday) H7-3-71 3

(Sunday) 2*6-6-71

(Sunday)

*Viii C^nniisioii's notiScation No. 464/J&K-HP/71(2), dated 12th February, 1971, the date of poll in 4-Ladakh parliamentary consti- OJtimsy was chaagsd from 7th March, 1971 to 6th June, 1971. **

- — , , , — , _____ w

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

18. Mysore . . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 4-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. <(Thursday) J3

7-3-71 3(Sunday) OT

>1 9 . Orissa"^ . . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. §

(Friday)

20. Punjab . . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 4 P.M. §(Friday) w

g21. Chandigarh . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. g

(Friday) «

22. Dadra and Nagar Haveli 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. O(Friday) *

X23. Delhi . . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 5-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. M

(Friday) oM

24. Goa, Daman and Diu 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 4-3-71 15-3-71 8A.M. to 5 P.M. M(Thursday) £

c25. Pondicherry . . 1-2-71 8-2-71 9-2-71 11-2-71 4-3-71 15-3-71 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. M

(Thursday) 5n

y H26. West Bengal * , . 3-2-71 10-2-71 11-2-71 13-2-71 10-3-71 20-3-71 7.30 A.M. to 4.30 P.M. 3

(Wednesday) (Wednesday) (Thursday) (Saturday) (Wednesday) 53

27. Tripura . . . 3-2-71 10-2-71 11-2-71 13-2-71 7-3-71 15-3-71 7.30 A.M. to 4.30 P.M.(Sunday)

WRITS AND PROGRAMMES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION 3 7

From the above Table it will be seen that the poll was taken on asingle day, namely, on the 1st March, 1971, in the Island Union territoryof the Andaman and Nicobar Islands; on the 4th March, 1971, in theUnion territories of Goa, Daman and Diu and Pondicherry; on the 5thMarch, 1971, in Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Orissa, Punjab, Chandigarh,Delhi and Dadra and Nagar Haveli; on the 7th March, 1971, in Tripuraand on the 10th March, 1971, in West Bengal. In the Union territoryof Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands, there was no necessity oftaking poll on 1st March, 1971. as the election was uncontcstcd.

The poll was taken on two days, namely, the 1st March, 1971 andthe 4th March, 1971, in the States of Assam, Gujarat and Madhya Pra-desh; on the 2nd March, 1971 and the 5th March, 1971, in HimachalPradesh; on the 6th March, 1971 and the 9th March, 1971, in Kerala;on the 4th March, 1971, and the 7th March, 1971, in Mysore; and in therest of the States and Union territories on three days, that is to say, onthe 1st March, 1971, 3rd March, 1971, and the 5th March, 1971, inBihar; on the 1st March, 1971, 4th March, 1971 and the 6th March, 1971,in Maharashtra and Rajasthan; on the 1st March, 1971, 4th March, 1971and the 7th March, 1971, in Tamil Nadu and Manipur; on the 1st March,1971, 3rd March, 1971 and the 5th March, 1971, in Uttar Pradesh; onthe 4th March,. 1971, 6th March, 1971 and the 7th March, 1971, inJammu and Kashmir. In Nagaland the election had to be spread over thewhole week commencing on the 1st March, 1971 (Monday) and ending onthe 6th March, 1971 (Saturday). In the case of Kerala, the 3rd March,1971, and the 6th March, 1971, were originally fixed as the dates of thepoll but because of the strike of the non-gazetted employees of the StateGovernment including Government School Teachers and Aided SchoolTeachers the dates of poll had to be changed on the 6th March, 1971 andthe 9th March, 1971 by amending notification No. S.O. 927 dated23rd February, 1971, issued by the Election Commission. The strike wascalled off on the 22nd February, 1971.

A number of days after the elections were over throughout thecountry, some politicians started smelling rat in regard to the date of pollfixed in the case of West Bengal, namely, the 10th March, 1971, ignoringthe abnormal situation caused by violence and murders in West Bengal bythose elements who did not believe in elections and efficacy of the ballotboxes such as the Naxalites and others. In the morning newspapers inNew Delhi as well as in Calcutta in those days the headlines almost invari-ably gave in bold letters the number of murders and other cases of violencecommitted in West Bengal, the whole State was in the grip of consternationand extreme panic. To allay the fear of the general public even the Armyhad to be called out in aid of civil power not only in Calcutta but alsoin other affected places in West Bengal. It was therefore considered abso-lutely necessary to bring as many contingents of Armed-police forces in-cluding Central Reserve Police and the Border Security Force from otherStates where elections could be held earlier. Armed-police forces were rushedto West Bengal not only from Assam, Bihar, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh butalso even from Punjab. In spite of that it was not possible to put a stop tomurders during the period immediately preceding the eleeion. The panic andconsternationwere so great that it became a problem as to how to get

3 EC/72—4


sufficient number of presiding and polling officers for taking the poll in27,237 polling stations in West Bengal. Even writ petitions were filed beforeCalcutta High Court by some persons who were appointed as presiding andpolling officers on the ground that they could not be forced to do electionduty unless they had accepted their appointments as presiding or polling offi-cers. Mention may be made in this connection of the case of K. P. Roy VersusD. Rudra—AIR 1971 Calcutta 461. It was under these abnormal cir-cumstances that the Election Commission had to fix the single day ofpoll in West Bengal on the 10th March, 1971, thereby making it possibleto draft the police forces from other States. Everybody and all politiciansunderstood the reasonableness and propriety of the step at that time, onthe day of poll, at the time of counting and declaration of results butafter a number of days some of the politicians found some mischieviousmotive in the fixation of the 10th of March, 1971, as the polling day.Their allegation was that this was intentionally done to make the opera-tion of chemicalised ballot papers a success. We shall revert to thismatter at the appropriate place in this Report. With the issue of thePresident's writ notifications and the Election Commission's programmenotifications, the election process started and it started in full swing.

For the purpose of reviewing the arrangements for the election aConference of Chief Electoral Officers of the States and Union territorieswas, as mentioned already, called at short notice on the 4th January,1971. In that Conference which was presided over by the Chief ElectionCommissioner of India all the details with respect to the latest position asto the electoral rolls, appointment of returning officers and assistant re-turning officers, the setting up of polling stations, the election pro-grammes, the hours of poll, the polling personnel, namely, the appoint-ment of presiding and polling officers, forms, stationery and other electionmaterials, symbol blocks, indelible ink, marking instruments, the paperfor printing of ballot papers, counting of votes, etc. etc. were discussedwith the Chief Electoral Officers who participated in the Conference andthey were asked to go back to their respective States and Union territoriesand devote themselves with their subordinates and staff to the work ofthe countrywide general election for constituting the Fifth Lok Sabha.

Along with the general elections for constituting a new House of thePeople, general elections for constituting new Legislative Assemblies in

| the States of Orissa, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal also were held.

As the conduct of the decennial census operations and the conductof the general election simultaneously were sure to give rise to practicaldifficulties as represented by a number of Chief Electoral Officers, it wasdecided after discussion in which a representative of the Registrar Generalalso participated, that the reference date for the purpose of the censusoperations should be the 31st of March, 1971, instead of the 1st March,1971, as originally proposed by the Registrar General. The Chief Elec-tion Commissioner assured the Conference that the matter would be takenup with the Ministry of Home Affairs and the State Governments to en-sure that the schools were not closed before census work was over, sothat the school teachers might be drafted for census work. As a matterof fact, the census operations were postponed for some time during theelection period and the reference date was also changed from the 1stMarch to the 31st March, 1971.

CHAPTER V

FROM NOMINATION TO WITHDRAWAL OF CANDIDATURES

" the standard of conduct in political elections in thiscountry (the United Kingdom) is now so high that public opi-nion would not readily countenance any deliberate attempt toelect a person known to be legally disabled.

"But if there is little danger of the nomination of those who arelegally disabled, there is nothing to prevent the nomination ofthose who are in various ways, personally unsuitable. Igno-rance, stupidity, meanness, self-seeking—none of these is anybar."

—J.F.S. Ross, Elections and Electors (1954) page 206.

The first step in the election process after the issue of the writ noti-fication and the programme notification is the nomination of candidatesfor elections. But the work of selection of candidates by the politicalparties starts earlier as soon as the general election is in the offing. Acandidate who is not sponsored and set up by any political party, thatis to say, an independent candidate, is a self-selected person and he canoffer himself as a candidate if he can secure the support of only one electorof the constituency to become his proposer and if he has, or can procure,the sum of money required to be deposited or filed along with the nomi-nation paper. An independent candidate is an anachronism in a repre-sentative democracy, specially in a parliamentary democracy where theExecutive Government is collectively responsible to the Lower House ofParliament, which in practical terms means, responsible in effect to theparty commanding majority in the Lower House. As has been stated bya recent writer:—

"Under representative institutions, the isolated individual, however,favourably situated in other respects is virtually helpless. Forall save a few outstanding personalities, political isolation oraloofness means political impotence; and in many cases thegreat 'independents' themselves would be more effective ifthey abandon their 'independence'."

—R. Bassett, The Essentials of Parliamentary Democracy (1964),pages 29-30.

The selection of candidates by political parties is undoubtedly a toughbusiness. It is not enough to select as candidates persons who possess allthe constitutional and legal qualifications and also do not suffer from anyconstitutional and legal disqualifications, it is very necessary that political

39

40 FROM NOMINATION TO WITHDRAWAL OF CANDIDATURES

parties, specially the well organised and well established parties, such asthe National Parties and the State Parties should take special care in select-ing and setting up as candidates only those persons who if elected, couldbe able to discharge their most responsible and onerous jobs as membersof Parliament. If the right type of person is not selected then the dangeris that the quality of representative institutions may not be commensuratewith what the electorate, that is, the people expect of the members of suchrepresentative institutions. They need not be experts or specialists as themembers of the executive and judicial branches of the Government. Butbecause the legislative branch has the ultimate control of all public policies,the members of the legislative branch should be men of vision, strongpractical commonsense, having keen awareness of the real needs of thepeople whose representatives they are, men whose range of perception andsympathy is not confined to their particular walk of life. In other words,they should be men of high qualities of mind, heart, and character. Theyshould be men possessing intelligence, breadth of vision, warm humansympathies, receptiveness to new ideas without any inhibition, balancedjudgment, capacity for hard work, mastery of detail and above all sterlingcharacter.

To pick and choose persons who come up to this standard, as can-didates for elections, is a really difficult task. But if well-establishedpolitical parties are to do their political role in a manner which will sub-serve the interests of the people at large, their leaders must have to bemen of such high character and calibre possessing the knack of selectingthe right type of persons—men and women—for the high offices ofmembers of Parliament. It is because the right type of persons are notselected at the initial stage that sometimes we hear complaints from thepublic that many members of Parliament do not come up to the standardswhich the people expect of them.

I think besides relying upon the judgment, foresight and goodsenseof the political parties in the matter of selecting proper persons as can-didates, the law also should step in to ensure as far as possible that properand suitable persons stand as candidates at elections to the House of thePeople and the Legislative Assemblies. If the law is amended as here-in below recommended, then the political parties also would exercise morecare in selection of candidates. Not only that, the number of independentcandidates would also come down considerably.

The law as contained in section 33 of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1951, at present requires only one elector of the constituencyto propose the name of a person as a candidate and sign the nominationpaper as such. Before the amendment to the law in 1956, the law re-quired that a second elector of the constituency should second the proposaland sign the nomination paper as seconder. But this requirement of aseconder was done away with by Representation of the People (SecondAmendment) Act, 1956 (27 of 1956). This was definitely a retrogradestep. This amendment simply overlooked and ignored the principles un-derlying the statutory requirement regarding proposers and seconders in

NOMINATION TO WITHDRAWAL OF CANDIDATURES 41

a nomination paper of a candidate. The first principle is that the personconcerned should be able to show even at the time of filing his nomina-tion paper that he is not totally unacceptable to at least a frw electors ofthe constituency, that he has some popularity and some backing in theconstituency. This requirement of proposers and seconders who must beelectors of "the constituency may make it difficult for a person who is a totalstranger in the constituency to stand as a candidate at the electionalthough under the law any elector of any parliamentary constituency inany part of India may stand as a candidate at an election to Lok Sabhafrom any other parliamentary constituency situated in any State or Unionterritory; and any elector of any assembly, constituency in a State maystand as a candidate at an election to the Legislative Assembly of thatState from any other assembly constituency situated within that State.These legal provisions are quite necessary because India is one and in-divisible and so also the Parliament of India, but unless a candidate enjoyspopularity throughout the country he may find it difficult to stand as acandidate for election to the Lok Sabha from any constituency in thecountry. And a measure of his popularity in a constituency outside hisown State is by and large his ability to procure the services of a few elec-tors in that constituency to be the proposers and seconders of his nomi-nation. These observations will apply mutatis mutandis to a candidatewho, if he is popular throughout the State, may stand successfully from anyassembly constituency in the State.

The second principle underlying the requirement of a number ofelectors of the constituency is that in the case of an uncontested election,the returned candidate is actually elected by at least a number of electorsof the constituency.

For these reasons, in Great Britain, in Canada, in Australia and prac-tically in every other country where parliamentary democracy prevails, thelaw provides that the nomination of a candidate must have the supportof a number of electors of the constituency. Thus in Great Britain atleast ten electors must support the candidate while he files his nominationpaper. Thus rule 8(1) of the Parliamentary Elections Rules in theSecond Schedule to the U.K. Representation of the People Act, 1949,provides—

"The nomination paper shall be subscribed by two electors as pro-poser and seconder, and by eight other electors as assentingto the nomination."

In Canada, a candidate must be nominated as a candidate for election tothe Canadian House of Commons by at least twentyfive electors. Thussection 21(5) of the Canada Elections Act, 1960 (Chapter XXXIX)provides—

"Any twentyfive or more electors qualified to vote in an electoraldistrict for which an election is to be held may nominate acandidate to be elected for suchelectoral district by signing a nomination paper "


A candidate for election to the Australian Senate or House of Represen-tatives must be nominated by not less than six electors of the constituency.Thus section 71 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act, 1918—1962 pro-vides inter alia—•

"A nomination shall be signed by not less thansix persons entitled to vote at the election for which the candidate isnominated."

There is no valid and good reason why in India also a person whowants to stand as a candidate at an election either to the House of thePeople or to a Legislative Assembly should not be nominated by a num-ber of electors of the constituency. Having regard to the large electoratein a parliamentary as well as in an assembly constituency, it is stronglyrecommended that a candidate for an election to the Lok Sabha shouldbe nominated by at least twentyfive electors as proposer, seconder andsupporters and a candidate for an election to a Legislative Assembly shouldbe nominated by at least ten electors of the constituency. A provisionlike this will have at least two effects. It is bound to enhance suitabilityof a person as a candidate for election to the House of the People or aLegislative Assembly. It will also have the effect of reducing the numberof candidates by eliminating to a large extent not only independents butalso others who are not fit to become the representatives of the people.This will also do away with the necessity of increasing the amount of de-posit under section 34 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

The Table below will show at a glance the total number of candidateswho filed nomination papers from the various States and Union territories,the number of candidates whose nomination papers were rejected, thenumber of candidates who withdrew their candidatures after scrutiny ofnomination papers and the number of contesting candidates left in thefield:

T A B L E

S t a t e / U n i o n T o t a l N o m i - W i t h - C o n t e s t -T e r r i t o r y n o m i n a - n a t i o n d r a w n i n g

t e d r e j e c t e d

1 2 3 4 5

A n d h r a P r a d e s h . . . . 3 2 8 6 1 1 5 2 0 7

A s s a m 8 8 . . 1 0 7 8B i h a r . . . . . . . 6 0 6 9 1 7 6 4 2 1G u j a r a t 2 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 8H a r y a n a . . . . . . 1 0 9 4 4 2 6 3H i m a c h a l P r a d e s h . . . . 3 2 . . 1 2 2 0J a m m u & K a s h m i r . . . . 5 2 3 1 7 3 2K e r a l a . . ,- . . . 1 0 4 . . 3 7 - 6 7M a d h y a P r a d e s h . . . . . 3 2 8 1 3 1 4 5 1 7 0M a h a r a s h t r a . . . . . . . . . 4 5 S 9 2 1 2 2 3 5M y s o r e . . . . 2 5 1 1 1 4 6 1 0 4

F R O M N O M I N A T I O N T O W I T H D R A W A L O F C A N D I D A T U R E S 4 3

1

N a g a l a n d . . . . . .

O r i s s a . . . .P u n j a b . . . . . . .R a j a s t h a n . . . . . .T a m i l N a d uU t t a r P r a d e s h . . . . . .W e s t B e n g a lA n d a m a n & N i c o b a r I s l a n d sC h a n d i g a r h . . . .D a d r a & N a g a r H a v e l i

D e l h iG o a , D a m a n & D i l i .L a c c a d i v e , M i n i c o y & A m i n d i v i I s l a n d sM a n i p u r . . . . . .P o n d i c h e r r y . . . . . .T r i p u r a . . . . . . .

G r a n d T o t a l :

2

2

94143231

212111

2091022

6103

24

1138

12

4 4 5 1

3

32

94

12

1

1

78

4

6

589391

222

145

103

3811

2

43

1 5 8 9

5

2

8583

129111543195

511

36413

11149

2 7 8 4

From the above Table, it will be seen that while the total number of personswho filed nomination papers was 4451, as many as 1589 withdrew theircandidatures under section 37 of the Representation of the People Act,1951 and 2784 remained in the field as contesting candidates. It may bementioned here that the total number of constituencies which were calledupon by the President to elect members to the Lok Sabha at the time of thegeneral election in March, 1971 was 518. There was only one uncontest-ed return under section 53 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.That was from the parliamentary constituency comprising the Union terri-tory of the Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands. The elections in theremaining constituencies were all contested elections.

The following Table gives a partywise break up of (a) contesting candi-dates, (b) candidates who were elected, and (c) candidates whose depositswere forfeited because none of them was elected and the number of validvotes polled by each such defeated candidate did not exceed one-sixth of thetotal number of valid votes polled by all the candidates in terms of section158(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951:

TABLE

Partywise contestants, elected and no. of those who forftiled deposits

Name of Party Contested Elected Forfeiteddeposits

1. Indian National Congress presided over by ShriJagjivan Ram 441 352 5

2. Indian National Congress presided over by ShriNijalingappa. 238 16 114


Name of Party

3. Swatantra Party

4. Bharatiya Jana Sangh5. Samyukta Socialist Party6. Praja Socialist Party7. Communist Party of India .8. Communist Party of India (M) .9. Others (State and unrecognised parties,

10. Independents .

Contested Elected Forfeiteddeposits

59157

93638785

4271134

23255215

18

46

64533230

2791064

2784 518 1705

It will be seen from the above Table that the number of defeated can-didates who forfeited their deposits was extremely large, namely, 1705.Out of a total number of 1134 independent candidates who contested theelections as many as 1064 lost their deposits. This clearly shows that thevoters do not want independent candidates at all. The number of candi-dates set up by the political parties who forfeited their deposits is also fairlylarge. This clearly supports the view which has already been expressed,namely, that unless political parties take special care and caution in select-ing candidates who possess at least in some measure the qualities whichthe people expect of Members of Parliament, the electorate will not hesi-tate to punish them in the shape of forfeiture of their deposits. The poli-tical parties should take a lesson from this in the matter of selecting candi-dates in a general election.

CHAPTER VI

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD

1. "For a long while before the appointed time has come, the elec-tion becomes the important and, so to speak, the all-engrossingtopic of discussion. Factional ardor is redoubled, and all theartificial passions which the imagination can create in a happyand peaceful land are agitated and brought to light. The Presi-dent, moreover, is absorbed by the cares of self-defense. He nolonger governs for the interest of the state, but for that of his re-election; he does homage to the majority, and instead of checkingits passions, as his duty commands, he frequently courts itsworst caprices. As the election draws near, the activity of in-trigue and the agitation of the populace increase; the citizens aredivided into hostile camps, each of which assumes the name ofits favourite candidate; the whole nation glows with feverishexcitement; the election is the daily theme of the press, the sub-ject of private conversation, the end of every thought and everyaction, the sole interest of the present. It is true as soon as thechoice is determined, this ardor is dispelled, calm returns, andthe river, which had nearly broken its banks, sinks to its usuallevel; but who can refrain from astonishment that such stormshould have arisen?"

—Alexis De Tocqueville-Democracy in America (First IndianEdition, 1964)—Volume I, pages 153-154.

2. "The actual voting is clearly less important, as Tocqueville showed,than the discussion which precedes the vote; for this discussiondefines policy, illuminates the situation and the forces availablefor dealing with it and should make all citizens more willing tolive in peace with those who disagree with themThe vote then in a democracy is an expression of an opinion,right or wrong, wise or foolish, following upon free discussion.Public discussion between those of opposing opinions is assumedto have given the vote its quality of intelligent consent."

—Delisle Burns, Democracy, pages 120-21.

3. "Poking cheap fun at the expense of those who serve the public(whatever may be the shade of their political opinions) is notthe way to promote active citizenship—it was the favourite gameof the Fascists and the Nazis on their way to power

Reckless promises which they later find they are unableto fulfil (because they have not previously worked diligently

45

46 THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD

enough to find out the true position of the economy) not onlyharm them personally as political figures, but—as they mustcome to realise—also discredit the democratic ideal."

—John Hudlestone of the School of Social Science, University ofBradford (in 1967-68) 21—Parliamentary Affairs, pages 224-225.

4. "Mankind being, for the most part, incapable of politics, acceptsvituperation as an easy and congenial substitute."

—George Bernard Shaw.

The period commencing immediately after the withdrawal of candi-datures in accordance with the provisions of section 37 of the Representa-tion of the People Act, 1951, and ending with the polling day, may roughlybe called the campaign period although under the law (section 126 of theRepresentation of the People Act, 1951) public meetings are prohibitedin any polling areas during the period of forty-eight hours ending withthe conclusion of the poll. This period is the crucial period for the con-testing candidates and the political parties. Under section 38 of theabovementioned Act, immediately after the expiry of the period withinwhich candidatures may be withdrawn under section 37, the returningofficer of the constituency is required to prepare and publish the list ofcontesting candidates, that is to say, the candidates who have not with-drawn their candidatures within the period fixed under section 37 andwho therefore remain in the field to fight the election. Each contestingcandidate is therefore in a position to know who are his actual rivals inthe election arena. He can accordingly arrange his tactics and direct hiscampaign for the purpose of fighting the election. The political partiesalso by whom candidates have been set up prepare themselves for the fightand start their campaign in full swing by holding meetings, demonstrationsand processions etc. and by distributing handbills, posters, pamphlets etc.in support of their candidates and criticising the public acts and conductof the candidates of the other parties as also by criticising the policies,programmes and ideologies of other political parties. In short, this periodis the most hectic period for the contesting candidates and the politicalparties. Under the law, as it stands at present, the minimum campaignperiod, that is, the period between the last date for the withdrawal ofcandidatures and the day of poll is 20 days but in actual practice, thisperiod is a little more, extending in some cases upto about even 25 or26 days. This cannot be avoided in a vast country like India at the timeof a countrywide general election to the Lok Sabha throughout the lengthand breadth of the country. Where however, a general election is heldonly to one or two legislative assemblies, the campaign period generallydoes not exceed 22 or 23 days. Originally, however, the minimum periodfixed by law was longer than at present. At the time of the First GeneralElection, the minimum statutory campaign period was 30 days under sec-tion 30 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. This period wasreduced to 20 days by the amendment of the law in 1956 so that theminimum statutory campaign period since the Second General Election of1957 has been 20 days. The Joint Committee of the Houses of Parlia-ment on the amendments to the Election Law, however, has recommended

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD 47

that this minimum period of 20 days should be reduced to 17 days. Theprincipal reason which weighed with the Joint Committee in making thissuggestion is that the reduction of the minimum period from 20 days to17 days will result in reducing the election expenses borne by the candi-dates and the political parties. There is no doubt some force in thisreasoning but some practical difficulties may arise in the printing of theballot papers and distribution of the same by the district election officers/returning officers to the various polling parties. It takes 2/3 days forthe Chief Electoral Officer of the State concerned to receive all the listsof contesting candidates from the returning officers of all the parlia-mentary constituencies or as the case may be, of the assembly constitu-encies. After carefully checking the various lists, the Chief ElectoralOfficer is in a position to give the print order to the State GovernmentPress and send the lists of contesting candidates to the press for printingthe ballot papers constituency wise. The printing of the ballot papers withcounterfoils takes in all its stages about ten days. After the printing andall its subsequent stages like checking, scrutiny, sorting, arranging andstitching into bundles, of the ballot papers are over, the ballot papers are sentunder strong police guard in vehicles which are more often than not policevehicles, to the returning officers who keep them in the Treasury or Sub-treasury. Therefrom the ballot papers are distributed to the various poll-ing parties and there are places in some States, like Assam, MadhyaPradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh etc. where there are polling stationsto reach which the polling parties take 4-5 days. In the case of somepolling stations in Assam it takes more than even seven days. From thisaspect, the minimum period of 17 days might cause some practical diffi-culties. Still the Commission is of the view that it is always better toreduce the minimum of the period under the law, and the Commissionwill always impress upon the State Chief Electoral Officers and the districtelection officers and returning officers that the printing of the ballot papersin the State Government presses must have to be finished in any case with-in a shorter time than at present. Experiments with this shorter periodmight first be started in some bye-elections so that the election machinerywould get used to it and thereafter it can be utilised on wider scale ingeneral elections.

The campaign period is also most important for the entire electionmachinery. All the steps in connection with the conduct of the poll areto be taken and completed during the campaign period. Reference hasbeen made above to the printing of ballot papers. Apart from that, thelists of polling stations are to be finalised with the prior approval of theElection Commission during this period. Under section 25 of the Representa-tion of the People Act, 1951, it is the statutory duty of the district electionofficer to provide with the previous approval of the Election Commissionsufficient number of polling stations for every constituency. Formerly, com-plaints used to be received from the candidates and the political parties thatthey got little opportunity in suggesting changes, modifications or improve-ments in the lists of polling stations. The Commission felt that there weregood grounds for such complaints. Accordingly, the Commission issued in-structions and directions to the district election officers that they should firstprepare the draft lists of polling stations within their respective jurisdictions,then publish the draft in suitable places and invite suggestions for changes or


improvements in the draft, they should also hold discussions with the re-presentatives of the various political parties and candidates and afterhaving made suitable changes in the draft lists and not before that theyshould send the draft lists to the Election Commission for its approval.This procedure is now invariably followed in finalising the lists of pollingstations. The result has been that the number of complaints from thecandidates and the political parties has substantially come down. Underthe law (section 25), publication of the lists of polling stations as approvedby the Commission is a statutory obligation on the part of the districtelection officer. It has been held in a number of cases decided by theHigh Courts that if the list of polling stations is not published as requiredby section 25, then that is noncompliance with section 25 and a groundfor an election petition under section 100 of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1951, vide Taziuddin Amin Vs. Dhani Ram Talukdar AIR1959 Assam 128. There is another case of the same High Court decidedin October, 1967, namely, Baharul Islam Vs. Kamini Mohan. Therefore,the district election officers should take every care to see that the lists ofpolling stations as approved by the Election Commission are invariablypublished in terms of section 25 of the Representation of the People Act,1951. It has been noticed in some cases that polling stations are changedat the last moment by the district election officers without the previousapproval of the Election Commission. This practice is a bad practice andshould be discontinued because this may give rise to election petitionsalthough such petitions will not likely to be allowed unless it can beproved that the result of the election has been materially affected by suchchange of polling station.

Polling stations should be made as numerous as possible so that avoter is not to walk a long distance from his house to reach the pollingstation where he is to go to cast his vote. If the distance between thevoter's residence and his polling station is a long one, then that gives en-couragement to the political parties and the candidates to offer vehiclesto the voters for conveying them free to the polling stations and to avoidthe trouble of walking a long distance the voters are also tempted to usesuch vehicles. Use of such free conveyance is a corrupt practice undersection 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. it is also anelectoral offence under section 133 of that Act. Therefore, every attemptshould be made to reduce the distance between the voter's residence andhis polling station by increasing as far as possible the number of pollingstations. At the Fourth General Election of 1967, the maximum distancebetween a voter's residence and his polling station was three miles. In1968, this was reduced to two miles and thereafter it has been now re-duced to two kilometres, i.e., one and a quarter of a mile. This was thedistance at the time of the Mid-term General Elections in 1969, at thetime of the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1971 and at thetime of the Fifth General Elections to the State Legislative Assembliesin 1972. The total number of polling stations at the time of the FifthGeneral Election to the Lck Sabha in 1971 was 3,42,944. At the timeof the Fourth General Election in 1967, the number was much less. Itwas only 2,67,555 and at the time of the Third General Election in 1962,it was still less, namely, 2,38,568. The following Table shows Statewise


the number of polling stations set up in the various States and Unionterritories at the time of the various general elections. The figures inrespect of the general elections to the various State Legislative Assembliesin 1972 are also given later in this Report.

TABLE

Number of Polling Stations set up during the last General Elections

S t a t e / U n i o n ter r i tory

1

1. A n d h r a Pradesh . . . . .

2. Assam . . . . . .

3. B iha r

4. Guja ra t . . . . . .

5. H a r y a n a . . . . . .

6. H i m a c h a l P radesh . . . .

7. J a m m u & K a s h m i r

8. Ke ra l a

9. M a d h y a Pradesh . . . .

10. M a h a r a s h t r a . . . . .

11 . Mysore . . . . . .

12. N a g a i a n d (1964) . . . .

13. Or i s sa

14. Punjab

15. Ra jas than . . . . . .

16. T a m i l N a d u . . . . .

17. U t t a r P radesh

18. West Bengal

1. A n d a m a n & N i c o b a r Islands

2. C h a n d i g a r h . . . .

3. D a d r a & N a g a r Havel i

4. Delh i

5. G o a , D a m a n & D i u . . . .

6. Laccadive, Min icoy & A m i n d i v i Is lands

7. M a n i p u r . . . . . .

8. Pondicherry (1964) . . . .

9. T r i p u r a . . . . . .

1962

2

21,587

5,814

24,215

10,960

1,152

7,946

17,303

20,921

12,598

3248,328

11,447

11.588

21,041

39,121

21,465

1,385

539213621

2,38,568

1967

3

23,816

6,481

29,213

11,554

4,741

2,255

2,525

8,366

19,191

22,947

14,011

363

8,960

6.866

12,913

23,862

42,369

22,650

123

8134

1,918

47026

709324787

2,67,555

1968-69

4

31,504

4,900

330

47,125

24,191

332

1,08,382

1971

5

27.928

7,808

36,487

14,737

5,570

2,825

3,094

10,353

25,728

33,124

21,433

57512,847

8,176

16,412

26,973

56,300

27,237

14213742

2,166

581, 26

836

3471,060

3,42,944


With the increase in the number of polling stations, the result has beenthat the number of cases in which the voters have availed themselves offree conveyance in vehicles provided by the parties and candidates to takethem to the polling stations has come down substantially not only in urbanareas but also in rural areas. This has been the general experiencethroughout the country, because although the maximum distance has beenfor the last three years only one and a quarter of a mile (two kilometres),the actual distance in a vast majority of cases between voters' residencesand the respective polling stations is not even one mile. In a good numberof cases it is half a mile or even less. Naturally, therefore, the votersdo not like to avail themselves of any free conveyance even when offered bythe candidates and political parties because they do not find any difficulty inwalking the small distance of two furlongs or half a mile to reach theirpolling stations. To reduce and ultimately to eliminate the corrupt practiceof free conveyance of voters in mechanically propelled vehicles offered bythe candidates and political parties, the Commission suggested a numberof remedies. Some of them were no doubt drastic. The Commission feltthat to root out a deep-seated malady sometimes a drastic remedy wasabsolutely necessary. A good number of these recommendations has beenadopted by the Joint Committee of Parliament although the more drasticones have not been adopted by the Joint Committee. The Commissionwould like very much that those recommendations also should be adoptedby Parliament.

Another important task during the campaign period is the finalisationof the polling personnel. As a matter of fact, the number of polling stationscan be increased even to a larger number but for the difficulty faced by theelection machinery in procuring the services of the huge army of pollingpersonnel required at the time of a countrywide general election. Evenwhen a countrywide general election to the Lok Sabha is held separatelyfrom the assembly elections, even then the total number of polling personnelrequired to man a polling station is four. This is the minimum number.In the last general election of 1971, as has already been mentioned,the number of polling stations set up throughout the country was 3,42,944.At the rate of four polling personnel for each polling station (one presidingofficer and three polling officers), the total number of presiding and pollingofficers required was about fourteen lakhs. The district election officerssand the returning officers faced extreme difficulties in getting such hugenumber of polling personnel. Sometimes cooperation of the Governmentdepartments, specially of the Central Government departments located atthe various State headquarters and in other places in the State is notobtained. Sometimes the employees themselves raise objection and expressunwillingness to serve as presiding and polling officers. The matter wentto such a length in West Bengal that even a writ petition was filed before theCalcutta High Court. It was alleged that a presiding officer or a pollingofficer might or might not accept the letter of appointment by which he hadbeen appointed as such and if he did not accept, then it could not be saidthat he had been appointed unilaterally as such by the district electionofficer under section 26 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.This was the case of K. P. Roy Vs. Rudra AIR 1971 Cal. 461. The HighCourt held that acceptance of the offer of appointment was not necessary inthe case of appointment of presiding officers or polling officers for thepurpose of elections to our National Parliament or to the State Assemblies.


Under article 23(2) of the Constitution, the State may impose compulsoryservice for public purposes. As service for purposes of elections for consti-tuting the National Parliament or the State Legislatures is par excellencea compulsory service for a public purpose, the question of acceptance of theoffer of appointment as presiding officer or polling officer does hardly arise. Bethat as it may, the Election Commission and the election machinery alwaysexperience difficulties at the time of the general elections in finding suitablepersons for appointment as presiding officers and polling officers. It isone of the principal reasons why the Commission is not in a position toincrease the number of polling stations further. Then the question of num-ber of police personnel is also there. If the number of polling stations isincreased still further, then the number of police personnel required toguard every polling station to maintain law and order will necessarily in-crease and this in its turn may require the splitting and staggering of thepoll in a particular State over a number of days with the result that inspiteof the best efforts of the Commission, it is not possible to hold the electionon a single day in a good number of States. The whole process thus appearsto be a vicious circle. Inspite of that, the number of polling stations hasbeen substantially increased reducing the maximum distance to one and aquarter of a mile and even then the number of days over which the poll hasbeen staggered has been fewer than before. It has already been shown thatin a good number of States and Union territories the election was held ona single day.

Then, during the campaign period, so many other details relating to theelection are to be attended to that this period places the greatest strainupon the entire election staff throughout the country. The following poll-ing materials had to be made available to the various polling stations num-bering about 3,43,000: —

(c) List of polling materials for a polling party

1. Indelible ink 1 Phial of 7.5 c . c .or 5 c.c. p e rpolling station.

2. Copying pencil . . . . . . . . . 23. Ordinary pencil . . . . . . . . . 24. Self inking pad (purple) . . . . . . . 25. Ink tablet . 2 red

2 blue6. Ink-pot . . . . . . . . . . 27. Pen-holder and nib . . . . . . . 2 each8. Blotting paper . . 1 sheet of D . F . size9. Foolscap paper . . . . . . . . . 4 sheets

10. Pins 1 pkt .11. Metal seal for presiding officer . . . . . 112. Ar row cross marks rubber s t amp for mark ing ballot papers 613. Sutli (Thread) 2 bundlesv4. Sealing wax 12 pieces

52 T H E CAMPAIGN PERIOD

15. Receipt for deposi t for challeged votes . . . . , 1 b o o k16. Mater ia l for vot ing c o m p a r t m e n t . . . . . 217. G u m paste . . . . . . . . . 1 bot t le18. Pusher . 119. Match Box 1

20. Blade 121. A n n bands for polling officers . . . . . . 622. Lanterns , if necessary —23. Meta l rule for detaching ballot papers from counter-foils 124. C lo th or rag for removing ink from t h u m b impression of

elector . . . . . . .

List of polling materials fjr a polling station

1. Paper seal . . . . . . . . . . 62. Stitched bundles of ballot papers with counterfoils3. C a r d board for s t rengthening paper seal . . . . 64. Passes for Polling Agents . . . . . . . 6

5. Rubber s t amp bearing dist inguishing m a r k of polling stat ion . 16. Packing paper 2 sheets

7. Work ing copy of the roll . . . . . . . 38. Addressed tags . . . . . . . . . 69. Labels for ballot boxes 6

10. Cover for unused ballot papers . . . . . . 211. Cover for counterfoils of used ballot papers . . . 312. Cover for tendered ballot papers and list of tendered votes . 213. Candle or debri . . . . . . . . . 6 candles or

1 debr i14. Ballot box 315. Flexible wire . . . . . . . . 1 yd.16. C u p or empty cigarette tins for set t ing the indelible ink bottle . 117. Not ice specifying polling area . . . . . . 2 copies18. List of contesting candidates ( F o r m 7-A) . . . . 2 copies19. Covers for re turned and cancelled ballot papers . . . 220. List of challenged votes ( F o r m 14) . . . . . 221 . Cover for unused paper seals . . . . . . 222. Appo in tmen t letters ( F o r m 10) 223. Presiding Officer's diary . . . . . . . 2 fool scap24. Cover for Ballot Paper Accoun t . . . . . . 225. Cover for Paper Seal Accoun t . . . . . . 226. Cover for marked copies of electoral rolls . . . . 227. Cover for other copy of electoral roll . . . . . 228. Cover for list of challenged votes ( F o r m 14) . . . . 229. Cover for letters of appo in tmen t of polling agents ( F o r m 10) . 230. Cover for Presiding Officer's diary . . . . 1

sheets

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD

,31. Covet for receipt book and cash forefeitcd, if any . . 132. Cover for Declarations of companions . .. . . . 133. Cover for Election Duty Certificates (Form 12-B) . v " . 134. Form of Ballot Paper Account (Form 16) . . . . 235. Form for Paper Seal Account . . . . . . 236. Form for companions of blind or infirm voters ... ... ... 1.037. Forms for list of blind infirm voters (Form 14-A) . . . 238. Canvas bag or a new cloth for wrapping ballot box or boxes .39. Sufficient quantity of ribbon or tape for securing the ballot

box by passing it on in all sides. . . . . . . . "40. Cover for ballot papers cancelled; voting procedure violated . 241. Cover for signed but unused ballot papers . . . 242. Cover for Presiding Officer's brief record under rule 40. . . 1'43. Cover for any other paper that the Returning Officer has directed

to be kept in a sealed packet. . . . . . . 1

From the above lists of polling materials for a polling party and apolling station, it will be observed that no figure has been mentioned againstthe item—"ballot paper". The reason for this is obvious. The number ofballot papers which will be necessary for a polling station can be exactlyascertained after the list of polling stations in a constituency has been finali-sed in terms of section 25 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951and the total number of electors assigned to that polling station is known.Only thereafter, the total number of ballot papers to be supplied for eachpolling station can be known and the number so ascertained then is handedover by the returning officer to the polling party headed by the presidingofficer when the party leaves for its polling station one or two days, in thehilly, forest and desert areas of Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthanetc. it may be even 5/6 days or even a week—before the date of the poll.The total number of ballot papers to be supplied to each polling station is,according to the instructions of the Election Commission contained in theHandbook for Returning Officers, equal to the number of electors assignedto that polling station rounded off to the next ten. Thus, suppose if thetotal number of electors allotted to a polling station is 872, then it shouldbe rounded off to 880 and this number of ballot papers should be handedover to the polling party for that polling station. [See paragraph 5 ofChapter VII of the Handbook for Returning Officers, 1970, which was inforce at the time of the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1971.The present instruction in this regard is also contained in paragraph 5 ofChapter VII of the Handbook for Returning Officers, 1972]. The pollingparties carrying the ballot papers and other polling materials to their res-pective polling stations are invariably escorted by the police guards. Thetotal number of ballot papers required for a constituency is determined asfollows :" The total numbers of ballot papers for all the polling stations inan assembly constituency are first addedTSgether. Thereafter, the grandtotal obtained by such addition is rounded off to the next higher hundredand that becomes the total number of ballot papers required for an assemb-ly constituency. Suppose the addition of the total number of ballot papers

3BC/72—5


gives a grand total of 69,910, then this number should be rounded off to70,000 and that will be the total number of ballot papers for that assemblyconstituency. This is also provided in the same paragraph 5 of ChapterVII of the Handbook for Returning Officers. The following Table showsState and Union territorywise the total number of electors and the totalnumber of ballot papers printed in connection with the Fifth GeneralElection to the Lok Sabha in 197k:

Statement showing the particulars of ballot papers printed in various GovernmentPresses for the General Elections, 1972

Name of the State/Union territory

Total No. of Name of the Press(es) whereElectorate ballot papers printed

for Lok Sabha

1. Andhra Pradesh .

2. Assam

3. Bihar .

4. Gujarat

2,26,68,583 2,29,84,000

62,67,677 64,53,300

3,09,11,092

1,15,34,565

3,17,76,000

1,22,00,000

1. Govt. Central Press, Hy-• derabad.

2. Govt. Sectt. Press, Hydera-bad.

3. Govt. Telugu Press, Hydera-bad.

1. Assam Govt. Press, Shillong.2. Assam Govt. Branch

Press, Gauhati.

1. Sectt. Press, Patna.2. Press & Forms, Bihar Gaya.

1. Govt. Press, Rajkot.2. Govt. Press, Bhavnagar.3. Govt. Press, Gandhinagar.4. Govt. Press, Baroda.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Haryana

Jammu & Kashmir

Kerala

Madhya Pradesh .

47,68,035

21,05,859

. l,02,2?,291

. 1,95,59,898

49,50,347

21,30,000

1,04,82,900

2,06,90,400

1.2.

1.

Govt. Press, Union territory,Chandigarh.

Govt. Press, Srinagar.Govt. Press, Jammu.

Govt. Press, Trivandrum.

Central Press, Bhopal.2. Regional Press, Indore.3. Regional Press, Rajnandgaon.4. Regional Press, Gwalior.5. Regional Press, Rewa.

9. Tamil Nadu 2,30,45,812 2,35,00,000 Govt. Press, Madras.

*HE CAMPAIGN PERIOD 55

10. Maharashtra

11. Mysore

12. Nagaland

2,39,94,771 2,55,47,042 1. Govt. Central Press, Bombay.2. Govt. Press, Nagpur.3. Yervada Prison Press, Poona.4. Govt. Press, Kolhapur.5. Govt. Press, Aurangabad.

1,37,89,683 1,39,75,000 Govt. Press, Bangalore.

Balloting system of voting. No ballot papers were printed

13. Orissa .

14. Punjab

15. Rajasthan .

16. Uttar Pradesh

17. West Bengal

18. Himachal Pradesh

19. Andaman & Nicobar

Islands

20. Chandigarh .

21. Dadra and Nagar Haveli

22. Delhi

23. Goa, Daman & Diu

24. Laccadive, Minicoy andAmindivi Islands

. 1,08,60,036 1,09,60,200 Orissa Govt. Press, Cuttack.

69,47,699 70,44,912 Govt. Press, Union territory,Chandigarh.

. 1,32,44,556 1,33,95,500 1. Govt. Central Press, Jaipur.2. Govt. Press, Alwar.3. Govt. Press, Bikaner.4. Govt. Press, Udaipur.5. Govt. Press, Jodhpur.

4,56,96,235 4,69,88,513 1. Govt. Press, Allahabad.2. Govt. Press, Aish Bagh.

Lucknow.3. Govt. Photo Litho Press

Roorkee.

2,17,14,745 2,33,86,100 1. West Bengal Govt. Press,Alipore, Calcutta-27.

2. West Bengal Govt. Press,Cooch Behar.

17,08,667 *16,49,400 Himachal Pradesh Govt. Prin-ting Press, Simla.

Balloting system of voting. No ballot papers were printed.

1,16,512 1,19,172 Govt. Press, Chandigarh.

33,012 34,000 Govt. Printing & StationeryBaroda (Gujarat State).

20,16,396 22,19,000 Govt. of India Press, MintoRoad, New Delhi.

4,35,168 4,40,900 Govt. Printing Press, Panaji.

Uncontested.

25. Manipur 5,43,407 5,70,000 Govt. Press, Manipur, Imphal.

56 THE CAMPAIGN:

1

26. Pondicherry . . 2,46,789 2,60,100 Govt. Printing Press, Pondi-. • cherry. . . . .

27. Tripura . . . 7,03,401 7,20,000 1. Govt. of India Press, Cal-cutta.

2. Govt. of Tripura Press,Agartala.

28. Meghalaya . . . Areas comprised in Meghalava are included in the relevantParliamentary constituencies in* Assam.

27,31,34,889 28,24,76,786

*The number of ballot papers printed is less than the total electorate because balloting• system of voting was followed in certain snowbound areas where election took place onthe 16th May, 1971 for which 75,000 ballot papers under the balloting system had beensupplied.

Along with the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha, General Electionswere also held for constituting the Legislative Assemblies of Orissa, TamilNadu and West Bengal. The total number of electors in these three Statesas shown in the above statement was—

1. Orissa . , ' '. .". I".. , . . ^ . . . . . .1,08,60,0362. Tamil Nadu •• . : 2,30,45,8123. West Bengal , 2,17,14,745

5,56,20,593

The total number of ballot papers for the assembly elections in these Stateswas the same as shown in the above Statement, namely,

1. Orissa 1,09,60,2002. Tamil Nadu . 2,35,CO,CCO3. West Bengal . , , . 2,33,86,100

5,78,46,300

Thus the total electorate for the Lok Sabha election was 27,31,34,889 andthe total electorate for the assembly elections in these three States was5,56,20,593. The grand total was 32,87,55,482.- Similarly, the totalnumber of ballot papers printed for the Lok Sabha elections was 28,24,76,786and the total number of ballot papers for election to the Legislative Assemb-lies of these three States was 5,78,46,300 and the grand total was about34,03,23,086.

The paper required for printing the ballot papers were manufacturedby five paper mills in the country and supplied direct by the mills them-selves to the various Government Presses through the Chief Electoral

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD; 57

Officers of the States and Union territories concerned. These five papermills were—

(1), M/s Orient Paper Mills Ltd., United Commercial Bank Build-ing, Parliament Street, New Delhi-1;

(2) M/s Mysore Paper Mills Ltd., Bhadrawati, Mysore;

(3) M/s Ballarpur Paper & Straw Board Mills Ltd., 124, Janpath,Thapar House, New Delhi-1; . - • • . , '

(4) M/s Titagarh Taper Mills Co. Ltd., Chartered Bank Building,Calcutta-1; and

(5) M/s Bengal Paper Mills Co. Ltd., 14-Netaji Subhas Road,

The paper was of a special substance, namely, 11.1 Kg. per ream andspecial colour, viz., cream wove/white wove and was manufactured onlyfor election purposes/ The paper was supplied, as already pointed out, tothe Director of Printing of the Presses (by whatever other name known inany State or Union territory) through the Chief Electoral Officer concerned.The actual printing of the ballot papers was done under the supervision andcontrol of the Chief Electoral Officer of the State or the Union territoryconcerned (exercised generally through respective returning officers of theconstituencies or their representatives), and the Superintendents of theGovernment Presses under maximum security conditions both during theprocess of printing and distribution of ballot papers from the presses to theReturning Officers or their representatives. The paper was manufacturedin the above-mentioned five mills on allocation made by the DirectorGeneral of Supplies and Disposals to the Government of India to whomthe respective Chief Electoral Officers sent their estimate of the paperrequired for the printing of ballot papers. This does not of course includethe pink paper required for printing the ballot papers for the assemblyelections in Orissa, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal.

It is not necessary to deal at greater length with ballot papers here asit is proposed to deal with the matter in detail in a subsequent chapter.

A few words are called for here about broadcasting facilities fromthe All India Radio at its National Hookup as well as from the various

, regional stations. Broadcasting plays a very important role in educatingthe electorate about the various issues involved in the election and aboutthe objects, policies, programmes and promises of the various politicalparties and candidates, In a vast country like India with an electoratelarger than the population of any country in the world except the People'sRepublic of China,, the problem to reach the electorate is indeed a veryserious one. Such a vast electorate can only be reached through the variousmedia of mass communication and one of the most important mass com-munication media is the broadcasting system par excellence. The masselectorate and the mass media of communication are both rather recent


phenomena. The situation in the nineteenth century or even in the begin-ning of this century was quite different. There was no radio, no cinemato-graph film, even the newspaper industry was not so widespread as it istoday nor was adult suffrage in vogue in many countries. Prof. William A.Robson in his little but valuable book "The Governors And The Governed"says—

"The politicians of the nineteenth century addressed small electoratesconsisting of fairly well educated persons, some of whom weretraditionally interested in politics. The modern electorate isso vast that it can only be reached through the media of masscommunication".—(page 58)

It must not be forgotten that the electoral process today has become in themain a contest in manipulation of voters by campaign and propaganda andin that process by the successful use and utilisation of various mass media,such as broadcasting, newspapers etc. The broadcasting facilities are beingavailed of in India by the people not only in urban areas but also in ruralareas. This is clearly shown by the extensive use of transistors in largenumbers by the people. It is quite often noticed that people coming fromthe rural areas to the towns or returning to their villages from the towns onbicycles often have transistors hanging from their shoulders. Even thepedestrians are quite often found listening to radio news and music whilewalking along roads and streets. It should also be borne in mind thatthe ordinary voter is not interested in the complex political and economicissues of the day. He is most particularly interested in the economic pro-blems which can be seen to have a direct bearing on his own immediateconditions.

Under all these conditions and circumstances, the utilisation of thefacilities offered by the All India Radio is of utmost importance to thepolitical parties. But unfortunately^ in spite of the best efforts of theElection Commission and the sincere desire of the All India Radio, thisvaluable and highly powerful institution of mass media has not been utilizedby the political parties up till now at the time of elections. The reason hasbeen that the principal political parties have not been able to come to anagreement on the use of the All India Radio and the distribution of thebroadcasting time amongst them. The Election Commission started makingattempts right since the First General Election of 1951-52. The lastattempt was made in the beginning of December, 1970 when it was notknown to any body that the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha wouldbe held in February-March, 1971 instead of in February-March, 1972.The Commission addressed a long letter to the various political parties onthe 7th December, 1970 but nothing came out ultimately because of lackof agreement among the political parties. Ultimately after a careful consi-deration of the matter the Commission has decided that it will not take theinitiative in the matter as attempts made by it on all previous occasionshave met with failure. On the 24th August, 1971, the Commission accor-dingly addressed a letter to the Director General of All India Radio inwhich it was stated "that the Commission does not propose to take anyinitiative in the matter as attempts made by it on previous occasions have


met with failure". I think the best thing will be for the political partiesto meet and sit together and try to come to some agreement on the utiliza-tion of the facilities which are available from the All India Radio. In GreatBritain also the political parties do the same. Thus in a small publicationof the Central Office of Information, London, it is stated—

"The arrangements for broadcasting during a general election aresettled in joint consultation between the British BroadcastingCorporation (BBC), the Independent Television Authority(ITA), and the main political parties—an agreed series ofparty election broadcasts, based on the number of candidatesa party is putting up, being transmitted on both the sound andtelevision services of the BBC and on independent television.The television broadcasts are relayed simultaneously by bothauthorities."

It is hoped that in future the political parties both National and State,should in consultation with the All India Radio be able to come tosome sort of agreement as in Great Britain on the utilisation of the Radioand Television at the time of elections.

During the campaign period in 1971—General Election the ElectionCommission also took a number of steps to give wide publicity to importantmatters relating to election. The Films Division, the Directorate of Adver-tising and Visual Publicity and the All India Radio—all under the Ministryof Information and Broadcasting—sincerely cooperated with the ElectionCommission in the matter of publicity by different means and methods.Two documentary films "Your Vote" and "Voting—Doing It Right" wereproduced by the Films Division. Cinema slides with the following captionswere prepared by the D.A.V.P. :

(a) Vote without fear. Your vote is secret;(b) Don't accept any bribe or inducement in casting vote;(c) Your polling station is nearby. Do not use transport provided

by candidate or agent;(d) It is your sacred duty to vote. Your vote elects your Govern-

ment.

The D.A.V.P. and AIR also arranged press advertisements and commercialradio broadcasts in relation to the following :

(a) All arrangements are being made to ensure that polling in theGeneral Elections is peaceful, free and fair. Intimidation ofvoters and impersonation in voting will be severely dealt with;

(b) Exercise your right to vote without fear or favour. Yourvote is secret;

(c) Do not accept any bribe or inducement in casting your vote;(d) Your polling station is near your residence. Do not use

transport provided by the candidate or his agent;(e) Remember, as an adult citizen, it is your sacred duty to vote.


•: In the iiext place, ail appeal to the People of India was made bythe! Chief; Election Commissioner. This was given the widest possiblepublicity through the various mass media like newspapers etc. The appealwas as follows: .

"An Appealto

The People of Indiaby

The Chief Election Commissioner of India

My fellow citizens,

The Fifth General Election to the House of the People is now nearat hand. At this time a heavy responsibility lies upon you because it isat the time of a general election that you get an opportunity to take adirect part in the government of the country by casting your vote infavour of the candidate of your choice. By your vote you elect themembers of the House of People and out of the members of the House ofthe People, our Rashtrapatiji appoints the Prime Minister of India andother Ministers. Thus in a very real sense, you are the ultimate rulersof this vast and great Ancient Land of Bharat. As an humble servant'of yours, I, therefore, make the following appeal to you:—

(i) do not fail to give your vote; :

(ii) give your vote in favour of the candidate of your own choicewithout any fear or favour;

(iii) do not be afraid of any intimidation or coercion or any threat ofintimidation or coercion;

(iv) if somebody dares to offer you any bribe or other illegal grati-fication, then take courage to drive that man away howeverpowerful he may be because he is a morally weak man; byoffering you bribe or other illegal gratification, he insults youas a man, as a self-respecting citizen of India;

(v) do not go to the polling booth in any vehicle offered by anyperson because the polling booth is only within one and one-fourth of a mile (two kilometres) from your residence. Eachone of us can easily walk this small distance.

If by your vote you elect proper persons, then our National Parlia-ment will consist of worthy sons and daughters of the land and our Gov-ernment also will be a truly good Government dedicated to the serviceand well-being of the People of India.

Sd/-New Delhi, (S.P. Sen-Varma)

... the 17th January, 1971."Chief Election Commissioner

of India

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD 6$

Lastly, the Chief Election Commissioner also spoke to the electorateon the 17th February, 1971 on the National hookup. The text of thespeech is produced below:

"Broadcast Talk of the Chief Election Commissioner of India,Shri S. P. Sen-Varma, dated the 11 th February, 1971.

AN APPEAL FOR PEACEFUL, FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONSMy Fellow Citizens,

The countrywide Fifth General Elections to constitute a new House ofthe People are on and each one of us is again going to get an opportunityto take a direct part in the governance of this vast country by electingour own representatives from the 518 parliamentary constituencies intowhich the whole of India has been divided. The House of the Peopleor, as we call it, the Lok Sabha has during the last 21 years made itselfby its functions, actions and performances an integral and indispensablepart of our national political life. In the course of these years it hasbecome 'The Grand Inquest of the Nation'. It has made and is makingthe people of India day by day a politically conscious people. This isan achievement of which every Indian should be proud. A tremendousresponsibility therefore lies upon each one of us, the voters, in choosingas members of the Lok Sabha the proper type of persons according tohis own choice and free will. The vote which the voter will be asked tocast on the day of the poll is nothing but an expression of his choice of thecandidate whom he considers best to be his representative in the mostpowerful organ of our constitutional machinery, the House of the People.Every voter may for this purpose listen to the discussions and speechesof various candidates and their leaders, supporters and followers. Butafter listening to all discussions and speeches the final choice of the per-son for whom he will vote shall have to be, and shall be, made by himand him alone.

But in the exercise of this free choice several big obstacles blockour way. First of all, there are candidates and their supporters—I be-lieve their number is not large—who have a big purse with which theymay come forward to offer bribes in cash or kind to the voters. Offer ofbribe is a positive affront to human personality and to the dignity of theindividual citizen because a voter is not commodity which can bepurchased by a man of means. Therefore, if anybody comes to youwith a direct or indirect suggestion for giving bribe to influence your choiceand judgement in giving your vote, please do not hesitate to turn himaway by the neck and, if possible, to hand him over to the police so thatbribery will be banished for ever from our system of elections.

In the next place, there is the fear that the more influential and themore affluent sections of the community may exercise intimidation andcoercion over voters who belong to the weaker sections of the people tovote for a particular candidate or not to vote at all. They are threatened


that if they do not do so, then they will be visited with dire consequencesin various shapes and forms. This is definitely not the way of democracy.

In the next place, and that is the most dangerous aspect, there isthe problem of violence and the application of physical force to influencethe pattern and trend of voting. This danger has assumed dangerousproportions this time in some parts of the country. Every day as weopen the morning newspapers we find reports of murders, stabbing, headbreaking and other violent crimes occasioned by clashes between thesupporters and followers of various political parties who have set up can-didates in these elections. In this respect a heavy responsibility lies uponthe leaders, representatives, supporters and followers of the politicalparties.

There is another kind of violence resorted to by persons who do nothave any faith in democratic elections. I am told that a good numberof these persons are young bright boys of our country. A few days back,I made an appeal to them. I would again request them to pause for amoment and to think that violence, though it may be supported by somegreat thinkers and great leaders of men as a means of achieving socialends under particular conditions and circumstances, may not be suitablefor, and necessary in, every country or situation. In the case of socialmaladies, as in the case of diseases of the body, the same remedy mayproduce entirely different results in different cases, because the history,tradition, philosophy and culture, constitution, structure and conditions ofone social organism may differ basically from those of another. EvenKarl Marx did not regard violence as a necessary means for bringingabout social revolution in England. This is clear from what FrederickEngles wrote in 1886 about Marx on this point in his preface to theEnglish Edition of 'Capital', (I quote) :—

"Meanwhile, each succeeding winter brings up afresh the greatquestion, 'What to do with the unemployed': but while thenumber of the unemployed .keeps swelling from year to year,there is no body to answer that question; and we can almostcalculate the moment when the unemployed losing patience,will take their own fate into their own hands. Surely, atsuch a moment, the voice ought to be heard of a man whosewhole theory is the result of a life-long study of the economichistory and conditions of England, and whom that study ledto the conclusion that at least in Europe, England is the onlycountry where the inevitable social revolution might be effect-ed entirely by peaceful and legal means." (I unquote).

In this connection, I may draw attention to the tremendous importanceand economic implications of universal adult suffrage introduced in thepolitical life of this country by article 326 of the Constitution of India.Universal adult suffrage in effect and substance provides for the transferof power and authority of the State from the few to the multitude so thatthe multitude may utilise that power and authority through their properly


elected representatives for their own good. As Prof. Laski once said,(I quote) :—

"The new economic order means universal suffrage; universalsuffrage means the conquest by the multitude of the powerto operate political institutions. They are bound to use thatpower so to operate them as to make them responsive tothe needs not so far met by the habits of the State. Theirauthority makes things seem a natural part of justice which,even a generation ago, would have been deemed impractica-ble by statesmen. They impose upon society conditionsfavourable to their preponderance in exactly the same wayas their predecessors. Law, morality, religion, move in termsof the new rhythm of life just as they have done when otherclasses attain to power. They elevate the conceptions ofwhich they have need into the same objects of veneration thatother conceptions have had in previous social system". (Iunquote).

The two most powerful giants which, in my view, are the causes ofthe present discontent among our young boys and girls are poverty andunemployment. Unless these two gigantic social evils can be effectivelytackled as quickly as possible, the present discontent will not disappearfrom among our boys and girls. Our educational system, I venture tosubmit, requires a thorough overhauling. More than half a» century back,the Calcutta University Commission presided over by the noted Britisheducationist, Sir Michael Sadler, described the system of education in thiscountry as a system that created expectations which could not be fulfilled.It goes without saying that unfulfilled expectations engender frustration.And frustration in its turn stirs up anger and violent passions, speciallywhen promises are held out to the impressionable youths that the paceof social transformation can be quickened through violent methods. Butviolence begets violence. And murder is its own cause because the otherside is there to take reprisal. It is a vicious circle. It is like primitiveblood feud which our ancient forefathers used to practise. Many of ouryoung boys and girls are, I am told, bright and brilliant. They are theflowers of the Land and light of the Nation. I appeal to them in allhumility in the name of this great Land, in the name of democracy andadult suffrage, and in the name of their bright and brilliant intellect, toreflect upon the economic implications of adult suffrage which, if properlyexercised and practised, can definitely help bring about social and econo-mic transformation of this land in an entirely peaceful manner.

I would appeal to the leaders and representatives, supporters andfollowers of various political parties who are participating in these elec-tions to desist from, and not to encourage, violence and other corrupt,evil and nefarious practices for the sake of winning elections. In GreatBritain, there has not been a single election petition on the ground of anycorrupt practice since the year 1911.


I need not miss this Opportunity,also to make a fervent appeal to thepresiding and polling officers, from some of whom I have received re-presentations and communications expressing their reluctance to do elec-tion duties on account of fear of violence, to shed their fear phychosisand to take part in the national duties in an absolutely impartial and fairmanner. In this connection I would make an earnest appeal to the emp-loyees of certain State Government to call off in the national interest theirindefinite strike and thereby ensure the smooth conduct of the poll.

And lastly, my earnest appeal is to the 275 millions of voters. Iappeal to them to muster courage and to turn up at the polling stations intheir thousands and millions on the polling day for the purpose of exercis-ing their valued right of casting their votes without fear for the candidatesof their own free choice and judgement.

At this important hour of our national life may the Supreme Dis-penser of India's Destiny lead the People towards a richer, fuller andbetter life.

I thank you, my Fellow Citizens."

The newspapers in the country, in English as well as in regionallanguages also, gave their unstinted cooperation and support in the matterof publicity relating to all aspects of the general election. The Commis-sion takes this opportunity to record its heartfelt and sincere appreciationof the help and cooperation received from the Press, various news agen-cies, All India Radio, the D.A.V.P., the Press Information Bureau andthe Films Division.

A few words about the reservation and allotment of symbols may bementioned here. Allotment of symbols to the candidates set up by theNational parties other than the Indian National Congress, to the candi-dates set up by the State parties and to the independent candidates wasdone in accordance with the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allot-ment) Order, 1968 and rules 5 and 10 of the Conduct of Elections Rules,1961. As a result of the split in the Indian National Congress, two rivalgroups emerged, one presided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram and the otherpresided over by Shri Nijalingappa. By the decision of the ElectionCommission in the Congress Symbol Case, the group led by Shri JagjivanRam was found to be the Indian National Congress. The group led byShri Nijalingappa however, was also recognised as a National party andit was asked to apply for reservation of symbol with a suitable namefor that group. Against the decision of the Election Commission anappeal was taken before the Supreme Court on behalf of the group ledby Shri Nijalingappa and an application was made before the SupremeCourt for the stay of the operation of the decision of the Election Com-mission. Accordingly, on the 20th January, 1971, the Supreme Courtgranted stay in the following words :—

"(1) THAT neither of the parties, viz. THE Indian NationalCongress of which Shri Jagjivan Ram is the President andthe Indian National Congress of which Shri S. Nijalingappa


is the President will be entitled to use the symbol of 'twobullocks with the yoke on' which has been reserved for theIndian National Congress, for the purpose of the Electionsto the Parliament and the State Legislatures pending thehearing and final disposal by this Court of the appeal above-mentioned; (2) THAT no effect shall be given to the decla-ration, given by the Election Commission of India New Delhiby its Decision dated the 11th January, 1971 sought to beappealed against herein that the group led by Shri Jagjivan

" Ram is the Indian National Congress; (3) THAT it shallbe open to the Election Commission of India, New Delhi toallot to the two parties referred to in clause one supra, sepa-rate symbols for the purpose of Elections which may takeplace pending the hearing and final disposal by this Court ofappeal above-mentioned."

Immediately thereafter, on the same day, i.e., 20th January, 1971, theCongress led by Shri Nijalingappa made an application for allotment ofone of the following four symbols in order of preference, namely :—

(1) Charkha.(2) Charkha being plied by a woman.(3) Mother with a child in arms.(4) A Kisan with sheaf of corn on her shoulder.

Before and after this date, the Congress led by Shri Jagjivan Ram objectedto the allotment of the symbol 'Charkha' to the group led by Shri Nijalin-gappa. Thus on the 9th January, 1971, i.e. before the delivery of the deci-sion in the Congress Symbol Case, the General Secretary of the group ledby Shri Jagjivan Ram, Shri H. N. Bahuguna, objected that the symbol'Charkha' should not be granted to the party led by Shri Nijalingappa asthe 'Charkha' "is a part and parcel of our party flag". Similar objectionwas taken by Shri Bahuguna by a letter to the Commission dated 20th Jan-uary, 1971. Thereafter, on the 24th January, 1971, Shri Jagjivan Ram,President of the Indian National Congress led by him, wrote a letter that thesymbol 'Child' might be reserved for his party. Then he mentioned thathe was giving the second and third preferences of the symbols for his partyas follows:

Second preference — "Calf and Cow"Third preference—"Youth bearing Torch".

In the meantime, the Bhartiya Kranti Dal had taken exception to thefourth preference of the Indian National Congress led by Shri Nijalingappa,namely, "A Kisan with sheaf of corn on her shoulder". Perhaps for thisreason that group gave up its claim to its fourth preference. As seriousobjection was taken by the Indian National Congress led by Shri JagjivanRam to the reservation of the symbol 'Charkha' to the Indian NationalCongress presided over by Shri Nijalingappa, the Commission decided thatthis symbol which was the first preference of the group led by Shri Nijalin-gappa should not be reserved for it. The Commission however decided


that the Indian National Congress presided over by Shri Nijalingappa mightbe allotted the symbol 'Charkha being plied by a Woman' which was its se-cond preference and as the second preference symbol was being reserved forthe Nijalingappa group, the Commission felt that justice demanded that thefirst preference symbol of the Jagivan Ram group should not be reservedfor it but the second preference symbol of that group, namely, 'Calf andCow' should be reserved. As the tension between the two groups at thattime was running very high, the Commission felt that interests of justicewould be amply served in this process and no one would then be in a posi-tion to raise any objection also if for each of the groups their respective se-cond preference symbols were reserved. A notification was issued on the25th January, 1971 to this effect. That notification is reproduced below:


New Delhi, the 25th January, 1971

NOTIFICATION

No. 56|71-I. Whereas the Indian National Congress led by Shri S. Nija-lingappa has as a temporary measure requested that any of the symbols men-tioned below in order of preference may be allotted to the said Congress,that is to say:—

(i) 'Charkha'

(ii) 'Charkha being plied by a woman'

(iii) 'Mother with a child in arms', and

(iv) 'A kisan with sheaf of corn on her shoulder';

And whereas the Indian National Congress led by Shri Jagjivan Ramhas as a temporary measure requested that any of the symbols mentioned be-low in order of preference may be allotted to the said Congress, that is tosay :—

(i) 'Child1

(.ii) 'Calf and cow'

(iii) 'Youth bearing torch';

And whereas by a subsequent letter, the Indian National Congress ledby Shri S. Nijalingappa has informed the Election Commission of India thatit is not pressing for the symbol 'A Kisan with sheaf of corn on her shoul-der' as its fourth preference;

THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD 6 ?

Now, therefore, in compliance of the Order of Supreme Court of Indiadated the 20th January, 1971, regarding the allotment of symbols and not-withstanding anything contained in the Election Symbols (Reservation andAllotment) Order, 1968, or any other notification issued thereunder and inexercise of the powers conferred on it by article 324 of the Constitution ofIndia, rule 5 and rule 10 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, andparagraph 6, paragraph 7, paragraph 8, and paragraph 18 of the ElectionSymbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, and all other powers en-abling it in that behalf, the Election Commission of India hereby directs:—

(a) that the symbol 'Charkha being plied by a woman' which is thesecond preference of the Indian National Congress led by ShriNijalingappa may be reserved as a temporary measure for thatCongress;

(b) the symbol 'Calf and cow' which is the second preference ofthe Indian National Congress led by Shri Jagjivan Ram, may bereserved as a temporary measures for that Congress;

in all the States and Union territories of India until further orders.

By order,

A. N. SEN,

Secretary"

A Press-Note also was issued on the very same day for the informationof the general public. But man with his limited knowledge thinks one wayin the belief that he was doing justice but inscrutable destiny produces justthe reverse result thereby amply proving the truth of what has been statedin the Shrimat Bhagavad Gita, that one has jurisdiction and competenceover his action (Karma) but none over the fruits of actions! On the 27thof January, objections were received from the Congress led by Shri Nija-lingappa, from the Bhartiya Kranti Dal, from Bhartiya Jana Sangh and fromthe Swatantra Party. Objections were also received from Shri C. Raja-gopalachari and Shri K. Kamaraj in identical words. The sum and subs-tance of all these objections were that the symbol 'Calf and Cow' or 'Go-maata' is an object of religious worship and therefore should not be broughtinto the arena of politics. Shri Homidaji of Madhya Pradesh CommunistParty also raised an objection on the ground describing 'Cow' symbol assemi-religious. Prof. N. G. Ranga raised objection on an entirely differentline. His objection was that the new symbol 'Calf and Cow' might be li-able to be mistaken by the people for former 'Two bullocks with yoke on'symbol and that therefore this mischivious confusion should be avoided.Prof. Ranga thus did not raise his objection on the plea that the symbol'Calf and Cow' was a religious symbol. The Secretary Kutch Rajput Sabhaalso objected to the symbol 'Calf and Cow' on religious grounds.

Dr. A. Natarajan of Madras, however, sent a telegram strongly criticisingthe views of Shri C. Rajagopalachari and Shri Kamaraj. His point wasthat the objection raised by Rajaji and Shri Kamaraj to the symbol 'Calf andCow' was equally applicable to the symbols 'Rising Sun', 'Lamp (Deepak)',and 'Star', etc.

68 THE CAMPAIGN PERIOD*

The Commission however sent all these objections on the very sameday, namely, the 27th January, 1971 to the Indian National Congress pre-sided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram. On the very same day, Shri JagjivanRam sent a letter to the Chief Election Commissioner that the objectionsraised with regard to the symbol "Calf and Cow' were "baseless andfrivolous", that there was no question of any close association of the conceptof "Two Bullocks with Yoke on" with "Calf and Cow"; and even illiterateelectorate can easily distinguish between the two. Then he said that :

"it was absolutely wrong to suggest that the symbol 'Calf and Cow'has religious associations. As a matter of fact, the conceptsignifies the progress, health of the Nation and prosperity in acountry where eighty per cent population depends on the ruraleconomy for their prosperity. The parties in reference haveobjected to the symbol malafide only in order to create confu-sion. Many amongst the recognised symbols find mention inone or other religious books but they have not been treated as

; religious symbols. The case of 'Calf and Cow' stands on adifferent footing altogether. The said symbol is nowhere treat-ed as a religious symbol by any religious books or Shastras".

• Then he said that in view of the close proximity of the general election,all the candidates of his party had been informed of the symbol 'Calf andCow' and State and district units of his party had already been informedto start campaign with that symbol, and that therefore no change shouldbe made at that stage in the symbol. •_••

After this, I recorded on the 29th January, 1971, the following notes:

"This telegram from Dr. A. Natarajan of Madras differs from theviews of Rajaji and Kamaraj regarding the allotment of sym-bol 'Calf and Cow' to the Indian National Congress led byShri Jagjivan Ram. According to him, the objections raised

' by Rajaji and Shri K. Kamraj apply equally to the symbols'Rising Sun', 'Star' and 'Lamp'. This is the view which wehave been holding all along. Several Supreme Court judg-ments, in the "Om flag" case, in the "Dhruva Star" case andthe Mysore High Court case relating to "Two bullocks withyoke on" make the position absolutely clear. The Hindu Pan-theon is so large and wide that in it any object, animate or in-animate, can be included as an object of religious veneration.Anyway, I need not dilate much on this point at this stage.

Sd/-(S. P. Sen-Varma)

29-1-1971"

The reason for the allotment of the symbol 'Calf and Cow' to thegroup led by Shri Jagjivan Ram was, as I have already stated, to do equaljustice between the two groups. Because the second preference symbol,namely 'Charkha being plied by a woman' was allotted to the Nijalingappagroup, I thought that in the interests of justice, the second preference sym-bol, namely, 'Calf and Cow' should be reserved for the other group also;


otherwise the Jagjivan Ram group had never asked for the second prefer-ence symbol. I thought that if the first preference of that group, namely,'CMld' WaS allotted to that group, then Shri Nijalingappa's group mightcriticise the decision as an unfair and unjust because to his group, the se-cond preference symbol had been granted. Moreover, it never struck methat objections might be raised on religious grounds. Having been influenc-ed by the profoundest ideas and fathomless thoughts of the Vedas, the Upa-nishads and>sthe Gita and having grown up in the traditions of Raja RamMohan Roy, Shri Rama Krishna Parmahansa, Swami Vivekananda, Rabin-dra Nath Tagore and Sri Aurobindo, it never occurred to me that objectionmight be raised on ground of religion to the reservation of the symbol 'Calfand Cow' to any party. The principal pillars on which the Hindu religionstands are 'Sarvam Khalwidam Brahma', 'Ayam Atma Brahma', 'Tattwa-masi' and 'Sohamasmi'. Swami Vivekananda in the Parliament of Reli-gions in Chicago in the year 1893 could conquer the West by relying onthis ennobling philosophy of Hindu religion and not upon any "Cow philo-sophy". The 'Cow' may be and should be the object of our extreme careand for that reason if one may like to say, even our reverence, but it is diffi-cult to accept the view that 'Cow' represents the Hindu religion. Even thosewho call 'Cow' 'Gomata' will, I think, feel insulted if they are addressed as'sons of the cow' "Gai Ke bachhe" instead of as sons of the Immortal"Amritasya Putrah". Under 'Sarvam Khaliwidam Brahma', everything,every created being, inanimate and animate, from the stars in infinite spacedown to the sands in the bed of the ocean, every thought, every action, inother words whatever has existed in the past, exists in the present or willor may exist in the future, whatever that has occurred to human mind andbrain in the past, occurs now or may occur in the future, whatever actionhas been done in the past, is being done now or may be done in the futureand in any place or space, will come within the range of this widest possibleconcept. In that view whatever symbol is used may be regarded as a reli-gious symbol. I need not cite here innumerable verses and passages fromthe Vedas, the Upanishads and the Gita for this purpose. Having regardto the grand concept of Hindu religion and Hindu philosophy, GeorgeBernard Shaw in his book "Everybody's Political What's What?", (2ndEdition, (1945), page 227), said:—

"The apparent multiplication of Gods is bewildering at the firstglance; but you soon discover that they are all the same Godin different aspects and functions and even sexes. There is al-ways one uttermost God who defies personification. Thismakes Hinduism the most tolerant religion in the world, becauseits one transcendant God includes all possible Gods, from ele-phant Gods, birds Gods and snake Gods, right upto the greatTrinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, which makes room forthe Virgin Mary and modern feminism by making Shiva a wo-man as well as a man. Christ is there as Krishna, who mightalso be Dionysos. In fact Hinduism is so elastic and so subtlethat the propoundest Methodist and the crudest idolater areequally at home in it."

Therefore, from the standpoint of principle and philosophy, it is difficultto regard the symbol 'Calf and Cow' as a religious symbol to the exclusionof any other symbol. If 'Calf and Cow' is to be regarded as a religious

3 EC/72—6


symbol, the 'Banyan Tree' reserved for the SSP at that time or the 'RisingSun' reserved for the DMK, or the 'Star' reserved for the Swatantra partyand the 'Lamp' (Deepak) reserved for the Bhartiya Jana Sangh should allbe regarded as religious symbols. Even the 'Elephant' or the 'Lion' shouldbe regarded as such. As has been pointed out, in that case no symbol,i.e., no pictorial representation of anything, can at all be used in elections.

Then, the Supreme Court and the other High Courts in * number ofcases have dealt with the question of religious symbols including the ques-tion whether the symbol 'Cow' is a religious symbol and have discussed themeaning and significance of religious symbols. After the general electionin 1971 in a number of election petitions, elections of the successful candi-dates were challenged on the ground that the elections had been vitiated bythe use by the returned candidates of the symbol 'Calf and Cow'. In anumber of cases, these points which were seriously canvassed before theHigh Courts, were rejected. In other cases, for example, the cases in theMysore High Court, these points were not ultimately pressed by the elec-tion petitioners finding perhaps that the objections and allegations raised bythem were hardly of any substance. Perhaps for all these reasons, at thetime of the Fifth General Elections to the various State Legislative Assem-blies, in 1972 the Commission did not receive any complaint or objectionas to the use of the symbol 'Calf and Cow' by the Indian National Con-gress.

CHAPTER VII

THE POLL

"The most obvious sign of democracy in any community is thevote. In the early nineteenth century the chief political issuewas the right to vote; adult suffrage for both sexes is nowgenerally regarded as the only true political democracy. Citi-zens are supposed to think of public affairs and to make deci-sions by voting on certain issues in public policy; and this isheld to distinguish a citizen from a subject."

—Delisle Burns, Democracy,pages 119-20.

2. "At a poll one vote is as good as another, the ignorant and un-reflecting counting for as much as the well-informed and wise,but in the formation of opinion knowledge and thought prevail."

Bryce,—Modern Democracies—(1962—Indian Edition), Vol. I,

page 180.

3. "The secret ballot, we now realise, is one of our basic libertiesnot to be given up without a struggle."

—Dimock & Dimock, American Gov-ernment in Action, page 294.

4. "The polling places should be so numerous as to be withineasy reach of every voter, and no expenses of conveyance atthe cost of the candidate, should be tolerated under any pre-text."

—John Stuart Mill, RepresentativeGovernment, Chapter X.

Already in some of the previous chapters, detailed information hasbeen given about the polling stations, polling personnel, the number of dayson which the poll was taken in various States and Union territories, print-ing of ballot papers and other polling materials required on the day ofpoll by the polling staff etc. in relation to the taking of the poll. It isunnecessary to repeat that information in extenso here.

The poll may be regarded as the culmination of the hectic activitiescarried on during the campaign period by the contesting candidates and

71

72 THE POLL

political parties. On the day of poll, the principal function of the contestingcandidates and the political parties and their workers is to see that thelargest number of voters come to the polling stations to cast their votes.For this purpose, the candidates and parties sometimes do not even hesi-tate to take to extra legal and illegal methods, such as, the free conveyanceof voters to the polling stations, or the offer of bribes to the voters witha view to influencing them in the matter of casting their votes in favourof any particular candidate or candidates. As the election is par excellencea fight for winning power to carry on the affairs of the most powerfulhuman association, namely, the State, the candidates and parties some-times do not hesitate to have recourse to any means and methods howeverillegal, immoral, foul or nefarious they may be. I am reminded in thisconnection of what I heard in the course of my tour which I undertookabout four years back to supervise a keenly contested bye-election in theSouth. The workers of a particular political party and candidate told mein presence of the election officers and others that after mid-night of thatday, which was the day immediately preceding the day of poll, distributionof money to the voters through the local representatives would start. 1immediately asked the police officers to keep a close watch on the situation.However, I am not in a position to say how far this allegation was correct.No election petition was filed in that case and nothing about the truth orotherwise of this allegation could, therefore, be found out. But this muchmay be said that the increase in the number of polling stations and thereduction of the maximum distance between the residence of a voter andhis polling station to two kilometres have undoubtedly lessened the corruptpractice of free conveyance of voters on the day of poll to the pollingstations. When the distance is two furlongs, half a mile or even a mile, veryfew voters would like to avail themselves of the free conveyance providedby or on behalf of the candidates. Then the giving of money to the votersto influence their voting in favour of a particular candidate cannot alwaysensure that all the voters to whom money has been given would vote infavour of that particular candidate. The voters possess strong common-sense and they know for whom to vote. Therefore, even if they acceptmoney from a particular candidate or his workers, they may cast theirvotes for another candidate.

As the total number of parliamentary constituencies was 518 through-out the country and the total number of polling stations throughout thecountry was about 3,43,000 (the exact number being 3,42,944) the numberof election staff for the conduct of the poll was fantastically high, as ithad to be. For each polling station, the minimum number of pollingpersonnel was four—one presiding officer and three polling officers. Insome States like Kerala, the number was five—-one presiding officer andfour polling officers. Even in the same State, in some constituencies, thenumber was five and in some others, the number was four. Then therewere returning officers for the 518 constituencies and five, six or sevenassistant returning officers to help the returning officers in each constituency.Thus the number of officers engaged in the conduct of elections to the LokSabha and the State Legislative Assemblies of Orissa, Tamil Nadu andWest Bengal in 1971 was more than 17 lakhs as will appear from the tablegiven below:—

THE POLL 73

TABLEInformation regarding number of officers engaged in conduct of General

Elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies of Orissa,Tamil Nadu and West Bengal held in 1971.

Name of State/Union territory

1. Andhra Pradesh2 . A s s a m . . . . . . .3. Bihar . . . . . . .4 . Gujara t . . .5. H a r y a n a . . . . . . .

6. Himacha l Pradesh7. J a m m u & K a s h m i r . . . . .8. Ke ra l a

9. M a d h y a Pradesh . . . . .10. M a h a r a s h t r a11. M a n i p u r

12. Meghalaya

13. Mysore . . . . . . .14. N a g a l a n d .15. Orissa . . . . . . .16. Pun jab . . . .1 7 . R a j a s t h a n . • ' - . ' » •

18. Tamil Nadu19. Tripura20. Uttar Pradesh21. West Bengal22. Andaman & Nicobar Islands23. Chandigarh24. Dadra & Nagar Haveli . . . .25. Delhi26. Goa, Daman & Diu27. Laccadive, Minicoy & Amindivi Islands.

28. Pondicherry . . . . • .

Total

Gazetted

5,0182,0549,4851,6482,375

8501,0962,4547,5454,058

168

. Included in

3,992513

2,7052,5014,2501,533

4498,158

14,39826

14616

2,225126

1

58

77,848

Non-gazetted

1,73,02540,570

1,08,65683,11924,47113,0109,127

67,6671,21,6051,81,377

3,422

the State

1,40,1176,181

88,02742 ,̂20046,093

1,86,9244,974

1,84,5921,46,743

870656289

12,9123,889

51,433

16,91,954

Total

1,78,04342,624

1,18,14184,76726,84613,86010,22370,121

1,29,1501,85,435

3,590

of Assam.

1,44,1096,694

90,732

44,70150,343

1,88,457

5,423

1,92,7501,61,141

896802

305 N

15,137

4,0156

1,491

17,69,802

As the majority of the presiding officers and the polling officers at a generalelection is drawn from amongst the Central Government employees and theState Government employees, the Commission requested on the 14th January,1971 the Government of India as well as the State Governments to declarethe day or days on which a particular area or constituency would go to thepoll as a local holiday or holidays for that area or constituencyso that those employed on election duty might reach their places

74 THE POLL

of duty in time. This would have enabled the Government emplo-yees to exercise their voting rights during the general election. Requestwas also made to the State Governments that the managements of commer-cial and industrial establishments might be persuaded to allow their em-ployees to have some time (about three hours) during the polling periodin order that they might be able to exercise their franchise if the commer-cial and industrial establishments could not agree to close down theiroffices and places of work altogether on the day or days vof polling. Atthe instance of the Commission, the Government of India, in the Ministryof Finance, issued an Office Memorandum on the 1st February, 1971 toall Ministries of the Central Government (with copies endorsed to all theState Governments) in which it was stated that—

"The President has been pleased to decide that during the ensuingGeneral Elections, an additional paid holiday may be grantedto the employees of the various industrial establishments underthe Central Government on the respective polling day(s) inthe particular area(s) if it does not fall on a Sunday or a'paid holiday provided the State Governments concerned have1

declared that day as a local holiday in the area."

Besides, on the 31st January, 1971, the Commission addressed a letterto the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs and to theChief Secretaries of all States and Union territories that the polling daymight be declared a holiday under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.This was done with a view to enable the working classes in factories andworkshops to exercise, their franchise. Before addressing that letter to theCentral and State Governments, the matter was discussed in the ChiefElectoral Officers' conference held in New Delhi on the 4th January, 1971.The Central and State Governments were also requested to consider whetherthe day or each of the days of poll in any constituency might not bedeclared as a closed holiday for shops and commercial establishments inthat constituency under the appropriate Shops and Commercial Establish-ments Acts in force therein instead of the usual day or days observed bythem as closed holidays during the week. They were also requested toask the factories situated in any constituency to declare the weekly holidayon the day of the poll instead of the first day of the week as providedin section 52 of the Factories Act, 1948. As a result of all these steps,(1) the day of poll in any constituency unless it was a Sunday or a publicholiday was declared as a public holiday under section 25 of the NegotiableInstruments Act, 1881 practically in every State and Union territory; and(2) the workers in factories and workshops and the employees of shops,commercial establishments and industrial concerns got sufficient opportu-nities to exercise their voting right. It is unnecessary to refer in detail tothe various orders issued by the various State Governments and the Unionterritory administrations.

It may be pointed out here that the Election Commission in the draftBill which it sent to the Government as well as in its Report on theMid-term General Elections in India, 1968-69, recommended that thereshould be provisions in the Representation of the People Act, 1951 itselffor compelling the employers of commercial, industrial and all otherbusiness establishments to allow their employees a paid holiday on the

THE POLL ' 75

day of poll in order to enable them to cast their votes. The JointCommittee of Parliament appointed to consider the various amendmentsin the Election Law has accepted this recommendation of the Commissionin toio. The Election Commission suggested that any contravention of anysuch provisions should be punishable with a fine which may extend toRs. 50/-. However, an exception was suggested by the Commission inthose cases where absence of employees might cause danger or substantialloss to the business. These recommendations have also been accepted bythe Joint Committee.

The Election Commission also suggested that provisions should bemade for the prohibition of sale or distribution of intoxicating, spirituousor fermented liquors or strong drinks at any hotel, eating-house, tavernor any other eating places, public or private, on any polling day withinthe polling area and during the twenty-four hours preceding the pollingday. This suggestion also has been accepted by the Joint Committee ofParliament but as the necessary law has not yet been passed, the Commis-sion wrote a letter on the 19th February, 1971, to all the State Governmentsand Union territory administrations requesting them that dry days shouldbe declared in each constituency on the day of the poll and on two daysimmediately preceding the day of poll. As a result of this request, almostevery State Government and Union territory administration declared thepolling day as well as two days or one day preceding the polling day asdry days. This helped a lot in attaining the object of ensuring peacefulelections throughout the country.

With a view to preventing impersonation and bogus voting under thecover of burqa, particularly in polling stations where large number ofpurdhanashin electors are assigned, the Commission addressed the ChiefElectoral Officers of all States and Union territories as early as 5thFebruary, 1970 that every attempt should be made to appoint lady presid-ing and polling officers in such polling stations subject to the availabilityof suitable women officers for the purpose. The Chief Electoral Officerswere asked to instruct the district election officers and the returning officersthat while drafting presiding and polling officers for a general election oreven for any bye-election, they should examine the availability of femalepolling personnel when appointing presiding and polling officers for pollingstations set up exclusively for female voters, specially where purdhanashinwomen were large. This would have the effect of also ensuring convenienceof female voters in casting their votes.

Under the law a few categories of persons arc entitled to vote bypostal ballot. While voting by proxy is prohibited by our election law,voting by postal ballot is permissible in certain cases. Section 59 of theRepresentation of the People Act, 1951, provides that at every electionwhere a poll is taken votes shall be given by ballot in such manner as maybe prescribed and no votes shall be received by proxy. This is a departurefrom the law in Great Britain where voting by proxy is allowed. Undersection 60 of the aforesaid Act, the following categories of persons canexercise their franchise by voting by postal ballot, namely—

(1) members of the armed forces of the Union;

76 THE POLL

(2) members of any force to which the provisions of the ArmyAct, 1950 have been made applicable whether with or withoutmodifications;

(3) members of an armed police force of a State who are servingoutside that State;

(4) persons who are employed under the Government of India inposts outside India;

(5) the wives of the aforesaid persons provided they are ordinarilyresiding with their respective husbands; and

(6) persons subjected to preventive detention under any law forthe time being in force.

The persons mentioned against items 1 to 5 must however be regis-tered as voters in the electoral rolls of their respective home constituenciesin accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) and sub-section (5)of section 20 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

In addition to the above six categories of persons, two other categoriesof persons can vote by postal ballot, namely, (1) special voters, and (2)voters on election duty. (See rule 17 and rule 18 of the Conduct ofElections Rules, 1961). A special voter means a person holding an officeto which the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 20 of the Represen-tation of the People Act, 1950 are declared to apply as well as the wife ofsuch person if he or she has been registered as an elector by virtue of astatement made in sub-section(5) of the said section 20. A voter onelection duty means any polling agent or any polling officer, presidingofficer, or any other public servant, who is an elector in the constituencyand by reason of his being on election duty at a polling station unable tovote at the polling station where he is entitled to vote. Thus, altogethereight categories of persons are entitled to vote by postal ballot at an electionto the House of the People or to a Legislative Assembly. The ElectionCommission some time back received representations from the NationalShipping Board and Maritime Union of India that facilities of postal ballotpapers should be extended to the officers and seamen of the IndianMerchant Navy. The total number of such officers and seamen will bein the neighbourhood of thirty thousand. From the very nature of theirduties these persons are more often than not to pass their time in theirvessels either at the various ports of the world or on the high seas. It is,therefore, practically impossible for them to cast their votes by comingto their respective polling stations. Such a large number of Indian citizensshould not be deprived of their franchise. After carefully considering thewhole matter and discussing the same with the representatives of the sea-men, the Commission recommended some time back that facility of postalballot should be extended to the officers and seamen of the Indian MerchantNavy. This recommendation of the Election Commission has been acceptedby the Joint Committee of Parliament on amendments of Election Law.The Commission hopes that this recommendation should be enacted byParliament as quickly as possible.

THE POLL 77

The Commission would like to point out at the same time, that thecategories of persons to whom the facility to vote by post may be extended,should not be expanded and increased any further. Voting by postalballot is somewhat unusual and courts in other countries have labelled ita special privilege. The Government and Parliament should be carefulnot to expand the categories of persons to whom the facilities of postalvoting may be made available.

The largest number of persons who exercise their franchise by postalvoting consists of course of the members of the armed forces of the Union.Under rule 5(2) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, the last partof the electoral roll contains only the names of service voters, i.e., themembers of the armed forces and the persons employed under the Govern-ment of India in a post outside India and their wives. The number ofspecial voters is very limited. Under sub-section(4) of section 20 of theRepresentation of the People Act, 1950, the holders of the following officesare special voters because these offices have been declared under thatsub-section by the President by a notification No. S.O. 959 dated 18thApril, 1960, namely—

1. The President of India.2. The Vice-President of India.3. Governors of States.4. Cabinet Ministers of the Union or of any State5. The Deputy Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission.6. The Ministers of State of the Union or any State.7. Deputy Ministers of the Union or of any State.8. The Speaker of the House of the People or of any State Legisla-

tive Assembly.9. The Chairman of any State Legislative Council.

10. Lieutenant Governors of Union territories.11. The Deputy Speaker of the House of the People or of any State

Legislative Assembly.12. The Deputy Chairman of the Council of States or of any State

Legislative Council.13. Parliamentary Secretaries of the Union or of any State.

A voter on election duty if he is a polling officer or a presiding officeror any other public servant on election duty, has an option in the matterof voting. He has the option either to vote by postal ballot or to vote inthe ordinary manner by going to the polling station. If he wishes to voteby post at an election, he will make an application to the Returning Officerin Form 12 attached to the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 in accordancewith rule 20 of the said Rules, and if the Returning Officer is satisfied thatthe applicant is a voter on election duty, he shall issue a postal ballot paperto him. But such voter may elect not to vote by post but in person bygoing to the polling station itself. This is provided for in rule 20(2) ofthe aforesaid Rules. In such a case, he has to apply to the Returning

78 THE POLL

Officer in Form 12A for an Election Duty Certificate (E.D.C.) and if theReturning Officer is satisfied that the applicant is such polling officer orpresiding officer or any other public servant on election duty in the consti-tuency, he shall issue to the applicant an Election Duty Certificate in Form12B and mark the words "E.D.C." against his name in the marked copyof the electoral roll to indicate that an election duty certificate has beenissued to him and shall also ensure that such voter is not allowed to voteat the polling station where he would otherwise have been entitled"to vote.Personal voting on the basis of E.D.C. can be exercised by a pollingofficer, a presiding officer or any other public servant on election dutyonly if he is on election duty in the constituency of which he is an electorbut he is on such duty at a polling station other than the one where he isentitled to vote. In such a case, he can vote at any polling station withinthe constituency other than the polling station where he would otherwisehave been entitled to vote. To ensure this, rule 35A of the Conduct ofElections Rules, 1961, provides that when such a person produces at thepolling station an election duty certificate in Form 12B and asks for aballot paper although the polling station is different from the one where heis entitled to vote, the presiding officer shall obtain on the election dutycertificate the signature of the person producing it, have the person's nameand the electoral roll number as mentioned in the E.D.C. entered at theend of the marked copy of the electoral roll and then issue to him theballot paper. Like any other elector of a constituency, a voter on electionduty cannot vote in a different constituency, whether by postal ballot or 01/the basis of "E.D.C."

This facility of voting on the basis of E.D.C. is not, however, avail-able to a voter on election duty who is the polling agent of any candidate.Such a person must have to vote only by postal ballot if he likes to voteat all.

In this connection, I may refer to some of the menaces and nefariouspractices resorted to specially in some parts of the country on the day of thepoll. One such disturbing menace is urchin voting, that is to say, voting byboys and youngsters of the age of 10,11, or 12 years or sometimes evenless. This happens mainly in the State of Bihar. Complaints have beenreceived in the past from candidates and others about it. The election officersdeputed by the Commission to supervise the elections have also narratedtheir experiences about urchin voting in Bihar to the same effect.These urchins and youngsters come to the polling stations infairly good number to vote either for eligible adult persons whose names areregistered in the electoral rolls or for themselves because the names of theseurchins have been wrongly registered in the electoral rolls either through theindifference or intentional negligence of the enumerators and other membersof the electoral registration staff. The Commission used to receive complaintsregarding this menace for quite a long time from various parts of Bihar.The officers of the Commission also came across such cases. Interestedpersons might have encouraged this evil practice but then the Commissioncould not remain a silent spectator. We decided to move. Therefore,the first move was taken in the draft Bill sent to the Governmenttowards the end of 1969, and in the Report on the Mid-term General Elections in India 1968-69, in the beginning of 1970, specificrecommendations were made for stopping this menace which disturbs and

THE POLL 79

tarnishes our elections. In the absence of any specific legal provisions inthis respect, the concerned presiding officers found it well nigh impossibleto stop such urchins from casting their votes even though there were gen-uine doubts that they were much below the voting age. The Commissionaccordingly recommended in Recommendation No. 19 in the Report that sec-tion 62 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 should be suitablyamended to provide that if an elector about whom the presiding officer issatisfied beyond reasonable doubt from the appearance of such elector andother facts and circumstances, if any, readily available to him, that such elec-tor is less than 21 years of age, insists on casting his vote on the groundthat his name is included in the electoral roll, the presiding officer shall—

(a) after warning him that he will be guilty of an offence if heproved to be less than 21 years of age, and

(b) after taking in the presence of two witnesses a signed writtenstatement from him to the effect that he is not less than21 years of age,

issue a ballot paper to him, but no such ballot paper should be issued tosuch an elector if he refuses to sign the written statement. The Joint Com-mittee of Parliament, however, did not accept this recommendation becausethe Committee felt that the cases of the kind envisaged by the ElectionCommission were likely to be very rare. The Committee observed thatthere might be borderline cases but by no stretch of imagination urchins of10 and 11 years of age could pose a problem of this nature. The Committeealso stated that there must be some finality to the electoral rolls. The Com-mittee therefore did not agree to clothe the presiding officers with powersof such arbitrary and wide nature to meet a stray or extreme case; thatwould be dangerous in the opinion of the Committee. It is difficult to agreewith this view of the Joint Committee or the reasons advanced in supportof that view when the senior officers of the Election Commission of thestatus of the Deputy Election Commissioners actually met with cases of ur-chin voting at the time of polling in Bihar.

There may be two situations in which urchin voting may take place.In the first place, some urchins may erroneously or inadvertently or even in-tentionally be included in the electoral rolls and on the basis of such errone-ous, inadvertent or intentional inclusion, the urchin may be persuaded byinterested persons to go to the polling stations to try their luck and makean attempt to cast their votes. Secondly, the urchins may personate. Theymay apply for ballot papers in the names of adult persons who have beencorrectly included in the electoral rolls or may even vote in some fictitiousnames. When the presiding officer finds an urchin asking for a ballotpaper in either of these situations, should the presiding officer issue theballot paper to him and thereby enable him to cast a vote by marking theballot paper? As the recommendation of the Election Commission hasnot been accepted and the law has not been amended, the Election Com-mission some time back issued instructions in exercise of its constitutionalpowers under article 324 of the constitution that in such a case the ballotpaper should not be issued to a person who prima facie appears to be anurchin of much below the age of 21 years. Article 326 of the Constitution

80 THE POLL

says that a person who is a citizen of India and is not less than 21 yearsof age shall subject to certain restrictions and limitations be entitled tobe registered as a voter. Section 19 of the Representation of the PeopleAct, 1950, provides inter alia that every person who is not less than21 years of age on the qualifying date shall be entitled to be registeredin the electoral roll. Thus, non-age is a legal and more important thanthat, a constitutional disability. This constitutional disability laid downin article 326 of the constitution cannot be removed by any legal provi-sion and has not been so removed by any provision of the law. Section 62of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 does not, as it cannot,contain any provision contrary to this constitutional provision. This iswhy the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a Full Bench decision has clearlylaid down that a person who is less than 21 years of age is not entitledto exercise his franchise by reason only of the fact that his name is enteredin the electoral roll. The view of the Kerala High Court is also tothe same effect. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has of coursetaken a contrary view. But there seems hardly any doubt that theviews of the Andhra Pradesh and Kerala High Courts are in conformitywith the constitutional provisions of article 326 and therefore, are betterviews. If we are to make our elections pure and fair, then, this constitu-tional disability should be applied against urchin voting with the utmostrigour. Therefore, if the names of urchins, say of the age of 10, 11, 12, 13or 14 years are included in the electoral rolls, they cannot be allowed tovote merely by the reason of the fact that their names are in the electoralrolls. Where however, the urchins have not been registered as voters inthe electoral rolls but have come to the polling stations to personate adultpersons whose names are in the electoral rolls, then in such cases, there areadequate provisions already in the law to deal with such cases of impersona-tion and stop the urchins from getting ballot papers for the purpose of vot-ing. The relevent provisions in this respect are contained in rule 36 and rule37 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. These rules are, very clear andquite sufficient when urchins personate other persons at the polling stations.

In order to put an end to this menace of urchin voting in Bihar, theCommission has, as mentioned earlier, taken steps by issuing necessarydirections to presiding officers with the results that urchin voting is nowfast disappearing from Bihar elections. This is supported by the fact thatin July, 1972, I received a letter from an important Member of Parliamentin Bihar that in polling station No.88 of Sissai assembly constituency ofLohardaga Parliamentary constituency, the presiding officer in collusionwith the patrolling Magistrate incharge objected to a few voters to theircasting votes under the plea that they were minors. This objection wasraised by the presiding officer himself rather than anybody else. TheMember then wrote that "it is not for the presiding officer nor for the pat-rolling Magistrate to assess the age of a particular voter at the material time,and if I may say so this is beyond the purview of the presiding officer."The Member brought this particular instance to the notice of the sub-di-visional officer who was the Returning officer of the assembly constituency,but the sub-divisional officer supported the views of the presiding officerand the patrolling Magistrate. This clearly shows that as a result of thesteps taken by the Commission, this menace of urchin voting is being pro-perly tackled by the returning and presiding officers. I explained the legal and

THE POLL 81

constitutional provisions to the Member of ParMament concerned and Ihope he was satisfied with my reply. The Commission, therefore, wouldagain request the Parliament and the Government to put a short provisionas indicated in Recommendation No. 19 in the Report on the Mid-termGeneral Elections, 1968-69. The powers proposed to be given to the pre-siding officers cannot be exercised arbitrarily because unless he can procuretwo witnesses and unless the voter prima facie appears to be an urchin, hewould not be able to move in the matter.

In this connection, it may be pointed out that this aspect of the mattermay also be carefully considered while considering the question of reduc-tion of the voting age from 21 years to 18 years, because while it is notvery difficult to distinguish a boy of 12, 13, or 14 or even 15 years from aboy of not less than 21 years of age, it may be difficult to distinguish a boyof 14 or 15 years from a boy of 18 years of age.

Another menace to which mention may be made is the removal of ballotboxes from polling stations at the time of the poll. Sometimes it is called"booth capturing". This menace, it may be pointed out, also comes mainlyfrom the State of Bihar with some stray cases in some other States. Aboutbooth capturing in Bihar, it may be pointed out that it has been in vogue inBihar for quite some time, at least since the Second General Elections of1957. The Report on the Fourth General Elections of 1967 makes specificmention of adjournment of poll and re-poll in Bihar on account of seriousdisturbances or apprehended breach of peace. In the General Election of1971, there were eight cases of removal of ballot boxes in Bihar by orga-nized gangs of goondas and other anti-social elements, two cases of removalof ballot boxes in Jammu & Kashmir and one such case in Haryana. Inthese eleven cases, the ballot boxes were snatched away from the pollingstations inspite of the best arrangements for safeguardingthe ballot boxes and the polling stations by postinga number of policemen often armed with fire arms. But inspite of sucharrangements, riotous mobs armed with deadly weapons like revolvers, pipe-guns, etc. attacked the polling stations, overwhelmed the security forces,threatened the presiding and polling officers and forcibly removed the ballotboxes in Bihar, Haryana and Jammu & Kashmir. A ballot box was removedfrom a polling station in Anantnag parliamentary constituency by a womanvoter under her frurqa. The names of these various polling stations aregiven below :—

Name of the Parliamentary Description of the pollingconstituency stations

BIHAR

1. 4-Gopalganj P.C. Polling station No. 7- ") Ballot boxes re-(22-Gopalganj A.C.) KatghaVra. | moved by orga-

2. 4-Gopalganj P.C.' Polling station No. 67- ! nised gangs of(23-Kuchaikot A.C.) Karmainimohabat. j goondas and riot-

3. 5-Siwan P.C. Polling station No. 30-L.P. { ous mobs from(27-Siwan A.C.) School Jansikri. J polling stations.

82 THE POLL

4. 7-Maharajganj P.C.(32-Maharajganj A.C.)

5. 28-Bhagalpur P.C.(t63-Sultanganj A.C.)

6. 33-NaIanda P.C.(200-Chandi A.C.)

7. 34-BarhP.C.(194-Fatwa A.C.)

8. 42-Nawada P.C.(252-Atri A.C.)

Polling station No. 105- ~)Rukundipur Middle SchoolPolling station No. 51-L.P.School Uchagaon (South Tola).Polling station No. 48-SeniorBasic School, Kornawan.Polling Station No. 95-L.P.School, Benipur.Polling station No. 41-KatariTehsil Katchery. j

Ballot Boxes re-moved by organi-sed gangs ofgoondas andriotous mobs frompolling stations.

JAMMU & KASFIMIR

9. 3-Anantnag P.C.(39-Anantnag A.C.)

10. 6-JammuP.C.(60-Samba A.C.)

Polling station No. 23-Malaknag.

Polling station No. 5-Badwana.

Ballot box re-moved by a wo-man in her burqa.Sealed ballotboxes snatchedaway by miscreantswho attacked thepolling party onthe road when itwas returningfrom the pollingstation aftercompleting thepoll.

11. 7-Mahendragarh P.C.(62-Kanina A.C.)

HARYANA

Polling station No. 2 atGovernment primary School,Dudhwa.

The ballot boxwas forcibly re-moved and latertampered withby organised gangsof goondas.

In all the above 11 cases fresh poll was directed by the Election Com-mission under section 58 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

In addition to these 11 cases, there were 55 more cases in some States,thus bringing the total number of cases in which the poll had to be ad-journed under section 57 or fresh poll had to be directed under section 58of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to 66. Of these 66 cases,the largest number, namely,52 occured in Bihar, 3 in Haryana, 6 in Jammu& Kashmir, one in Nagaland, one in Orissa, and 3 in Uttar Pradesh. Thusit is clear that in the matter of this vicious practice of removal of ballotboxes or snatching away of bundles of ballot papers and marking them bymembers of unruly and riotous mobs and then dropping them into the ballotboxes or in the matter breaking the seals of the ballot boxes etc., the Stateof Bihar comes first. A question naturally arises who encourage this sordidpractice in Bihar? Those who are conversant with the social, economicand political conditions of Bihar, know that economically inspite of itsvast natural resources, Bihar is a backward State; socially it is perhaps the

THE POLL 83

most caste-ridden State in the whole India and this bane of excessive caste-ism vitiates in no mean degree the political atmosphere in the State. Poli-ticians and their workers and supporters belonging mainly to three dominantcastes, to whatever party or parties they may belong, take a leading partin arranging or instigating 'booth capturing' by organised goondas or hood-lums in large numbers necessitating the holding of re-poll under section 57and fresh poll under section 58 in the concerned polling stations. Unless thepoliticians and political parties not only desist from indulging in or encourag-ing this nasty practice at elections but also openly denounce it with unitedvoice in unequivocal terms, no arrangement however, efficient it may be, caneradicate this evil. To stop this practice in Bihar, poll has all along beenstaggered and spread (except in the Mid-term Election of 1969 when it wastaken on a single day throughout the State) on a number of days. It is veryeasy to rouse feelings of hatred and enmity among the various sections of thepeople, most of whom are illiterate and stepped in centuries-old supersti-tions and blind traditions which more often than not even pass for religion.These feelings of hatred and enmity among different castes and communi-ties once raised are difficult to quench and assuage. Those who indulge inor encourage these things are real enemies of the country because bytheir action they bring about disunity among the people and thwart theprocess of national integration. The following table will show the numberof cases which occurred at the time of the general election in 1971 in thevarious States:—

TABLE

STATE OF BIHAR

(Total number of cases 52)

I Statement showing fresh poll ordered by the Election Commission under section58 (2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Name of the parliamentary Description of polling stationconstituency

Causes of fresh poll

4-Gopalganj

5-Siwan .

1. 44-Baranbi Panchayat Bha-wan

2. 81-PatkauliaGaura

3. 74-Krishnavarma4. 79-Banthusiram

Ballot papers werestamped in respectof a particular candi-date by the unrulymob and dropped in-to the ballot boxes orthe seals of the ballotboxes were broken.

Do.Do.

7-Maharajganj . 5. 3-Karamkudariha6. 64-Jajoli

Do.Do.

THE POLL

Name of the parliamentaryconstituency

Description of polling station Causes of fresh poll

10-Muzaffarpur 7. 25-Sutapatti8. 36-Silaut Bhimal9. 53-Paigamerpur Tola

Ramnagar.10. 94-Akhiarpur11. 97-Aropur

Ballot papers werestamped in respectof a particularCandidate by theunruly mob anddropped into theballot boxes or theseals of the ballotboxes were broken

13-Jainagar

15-Samastipur .

27-Banka .

29-Monghyr

32-Begusarai

34-Barh .

35-Patna .

38-Bikramganj .

40-Aurangabad .

41-Jahanabad

42-Nawada

43-Gaya (SC) .

. 12. 49-Khirhar Kauya M.School

13. 50-Khirhar Kauya M.

14. 79-Kharghani M. School

. 15. 64-Rajpur Middle School,Jaunpur.

16. 65- Do.

. 17. 83-L.P. School, Gangati.18. 86-L.P. School, Manikpur.

. 19. 60-Middle School, Gauripur

. 20. 72-Hazipur

. 21. 10-Middle School, VillageMore.

22. 11-Middle School, VillageMore.

23. 23-U.P. School Burmichak.24. 84-Lady Teachers Training

School, Lakhanchand

. 25. l-Gonwan26. 2-Gonwan27. 4-Karai28. 22-Savarchak29. 75-Noora

. 30. 78-Baisadin

. 31. 119-U.P. School, Taredih

. 32. 35-Dharpur

. 33. 61-Khiri

. 34. 4-Poultry Farm OfficeBuilding, Tejuna.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.Do.

6 6 6 6

Do.

Do.

Do.

De.

Do.

THE POLL 85

If—Statement showing fresh poll ordered by the Election Commission under section 58(2)of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. (8 cases).

Name of the parliamentary Description of polling station Causes for fresh pollconstituency •

4-Gopalganj . . . J. 7-Katgharvva Ballot boxes wereremoved from the pol-ling station.

2. 67-Karmainimohabat Do.

5-Siwan . . . . 3 . 30-L.P. School, Jansikri. Do.

7-Maliarajganj . . . 4. 105-Rukundipur MiddleSchool. Do.

28-Bhagalpur . . . 5 . 51-L. P. School, Uchagaon, Do.(South Tola)

33-NaIanda

34-Barh .

42-Kawada

If!—Statement showing adjournment of poll and recommencement of poll on subsequentdays ordered by the Election Commission under section 57 of the Representationof the People Act, 1951. (10 cases).

6.

7.

8.

48-Senior Basic School,Kornawan.

95-L.P. School, Bcnipur.

41-Katari Tahsil, Katchery

Do.

Do.

Do.

Name of the parliamentary Description of polling station Causes for adjournmentconstituency. of poll

13-Jainagar . . . 1. 44-Rajaun L.P, School. Poll was adjourned dueto threat of violence.

31-Khagana

34-Barh .

35-Patna .

36-Shahabad

38-Bikramganj .

TOTAL

3 £ C/72—7

2. 28-Pokhana

3. 86-Ramsaran Samarak H.E. School (E.W.) Mok-ameh Ghat.

4. 115-MiddIe School, Kesho-pur.

5. 7-Ajwan6. 8-Ajwan

7. 12-Bihta8. 83-Arap Panchavat Bhawan9. 84-Arap Panchayat Bhawan

. 10. 89-Niger

52

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.Do.

Do.Do.Do.

Do.

86 THE POLL

HARYANA

{Total number of cases—3)


Description of polling station Causes for fresh poll/adjournment of poll

5-Jhajjar

6-Gurgaon

1. P.S. No. 2 (36-Rai Assembly Poll adjourned and re-constituency), commencement of poll

directed on a subse-quent day under se-ction 57(2) of theRepresentation of thePeople Act, 1951, dueto illegal stamping ofballot papers by apolling officer in fa-vour of a particularcandidate.

2. P.S. No. 62 (53-Sohna Fresh poll directedassembly constituency).

7-Mahendragarh

under section 58(2) ofthe Representation ofthe People Act, 1951for snatching awayof ballot papers andtheir illegal insertionin ballot box.

3. P.S. No. 2 in (62-Kanina Fresh poll directedassembly constituency). under section 58(2)

of the Representationof the People Act,1951 on forcible re-moval and tamperingof ballot box.

JAMMU AND KASHMIR

{Total number of cases—6)

Name of ths parliamentary Description of polling station Causes for fresh poll/constituency adjournment of poll

5-Udhampur 1. 25-Drung (57-Billawar As- Poll adjourned and re-sembly constituency).

2. 45-Dambra (56-Basohli as-sembly constituency).

commencement ofpoll directed undersection 57(2) of theRepresentation of thePeople Act, 1951 onaccount of disturb-ance of peace result-ing from a clashbetween the two gro-ups of voters at the

polling station.

THE POLL 87


Description of polling station

3-Anantnag 3. 23-Malaknag (39-AnantnagAssembly Constituency)

Causes for fresh poll/adjournment of poll

Fresh poll directedunder section 58 (2) ofthe Representation ofthe People Act, 1951as the ballot box usedat the polling stationwas unlawfully takenaway from the pol-ling station by awoman voter underher burqa.

1-Baramulla 4. 14-Madanpore (3-LolabAssembly constituency)

6-Jammu , 5. 5-Badwana (60-Samba As-sembly constituency).

6. 32-Bhangdaur (60-SambaAssembly constituency).

Fresh poll directed asthe ballot box andthe packets pertainingto the polling stationwere not deposited inthe District Treasuryafter the poll but werefound missing from thetruck in which theywere being carried.

Fresh poll directed asthe ballot boxes usedat the polling stationwere unlawfully takenout of the custody ofthe presiding officerand tampered with bymiscreants.

Fresh poll directed assome ballot paperswere snatched awayfrom the custody ofthe presiding officer.

NAGALAND

{one case)


Description of polling station Causes for fresh poll

Nagaland . 1-Aghuito (35-SetakhaAssembly constituency)

Fresh poll directed asthe ballot boxes usedat the polling stationwere found tamperedwith.

THE POLL

ORISSA

{One case)


Description of polling station Causes for fresh poll

16-Sambalour 81-K.endumuddi Upper Pri- Fresh poll directed asmary School (112-Bha- the presiding officertli assembly constituency) closed the poll at

4.00 p.m. instead of5.00 p.m. by mistake.

UTTAR PRADESH

(Three cases)


6-Atnroha

81-Baghpat

Description of polling station Causes for adjournmentof poll

1. 20-K.esra (27-Hasanpur As-sembly constituency).

2. 80-Hajurabad-Garhi3. 81-Hajurabad-Garhi

(399-Barnawa assemblyconstituency)

The poll in these threepolling stations wasadjourned and re-commencement of polldirected on account ofdisturbance of thepeace.

I have given details of these 66 cases of fresh poll or re-poll aboveto draw the attention of the politicians, the political parties, the membersof Parliament and the members of the general public to see for themselvescauses which led the Election Commission to direct fresh poll or re-poll-in the 66 polling stations. The most glaring of course is the case of Bihar.As i have already pointed out, out of the 66 cases, as many as 52 occurredin Bihar. It may be said that the figure 66 is very insignificant in view thehuge number of polling stations set up at the time of the general electionin 1971. This number was, as has already been mentioned. 3,42,944. Itmay further be said that even in Bihar, the total number of polling stationsset up in 1971 was more than thirtysix thousand, the actual number being36,487 and the figure 52 is insignificant out of this huge number. Thatmay be, but still the question which naturally occurs to a right thinkingand intelligent man is as to why of all States and Union territories of India,Bihar heads the list in respect of this sordid practice such as removal ofballot boxes, booth capturing, forcible snatching away of ballot papers andso on and so forth. Next to Bihar, comes Jammu and Kashmir. The totalnumber of polling stations where these practices were resorted to was six.This number may not be regarded as high when we remember that the total

THE POLL s9

number of polling stations set up in this State in 1971 was 3,094. It istrue that both in Bihar and Jammu & Kashmir, the number of such caseswhich occurred previously were larger and that such cases have substantiallycome down but still the question remains why they should occur at all.Unless public conscience is stirred to its depth against these evil practicesand the standard of public and electoral morality is raised, no police arrange-ment or no legal provisions, however, adequate they may be, can root outthese practices from our elections. It, therefore, lies upon the leaders' of allpolitical parties and the Members of Parliament irrespective of their partyaffiliation to create a health}' public opinion among the masses of the people.As Viscount .Bryce observed in his 'Modern Democracies' —

"As the excellence of public opinion — its good sense, its tolerance,its pervasive activity — is the real test of a nation's fitness forself-government, so the power it exerts, being constantly feltas the supreme arbiter irrespective of electoral machinery, isthe best guarantee for the smooth and successful working ofpopular government, and the best safeguard against revolution-ary violence."

"What docs a nation need to secure that excellence andto enable Opinion to exert its power as Supreme? Besides theconditions already enumerated, the things to be chiefly desiredarc :

"The presence in the nation of many vigorous minds,constructive and critical, constantly occupied in the public dis-cussion of the current problems of statesmanship. These arethe minds already referred to as constituting that first andrelatively small class which makes Opinion."

"The preponderance in the rest of the nation of men ofthe second, as compared with men of the third, of the threeclasses aforesaid, i.e. persons whose sense of civic duty makesthem give steady attention to public affairs, and who bring totheir consideration a fair judgment and an insight into char-acter which, unseduced by the demagogue, respects uprightnessand capacity in the leader who has given proof of thesequalities."

"In countries like France, the United States, and Britain,men of the first class are never wanting. But a nation needssomething more than the intellectual guidance which such mencan give. Among them there must also be leaders of firmnesswhich will, face opprobrium and defend causes for the momentunpopular. The chief defect of public opinion is its tendencyin times of excitement to overbear opposition and silence thevoices it does not wish to hear. Courage is the highest andperhaps the rarest quality among politicians. It is speciallyneeded in democratic countries."

— Modern Democracies (Indian Edi-tion brought out by the World PressPrivate Ltd., Calcutta, 1962) Volume

I. pages 181-82.

90 ; THE POLL

Here I may mention that there was only one case of countermandingof the poll under section 52 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951in the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha. The poll had to be counter-manded in 21-Nagpur parliamentary constituency in the State of Maha-rashtra on account of the death of one of the contesting candidates, namely,Shri Haridas Damaji Awadi (RPI-Khobragade group) and fresh poll in thisparliamentary constituency was taken on the 18th April, 1971 in whichShri Dhote Jambuwantrao Bapurao (Forward Bloc) was declared elected.There were a few cases of countermanding of the poll under the aforesaidsection in one assembly constituency in Orissa and three assembly consti-tuencies in West Bengal. It should be recalled that general elections to theLegislative Assemblies of Orissa, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal were alsoheld simultaneously along with the Fifth General Elections to the LokSabha in 1971. The poll had to be countermanded in 59-Nayagarh assemblyconstituency in Orissa on account of the death of Shri Durga Madhab Deo(Swatantra) a contesting candidate. Fresh poll was taken in that consti-tuency on the 2nd May, 1971 in which Shri Achyutananda Mohanty (UtkalCongress) was declared elected.

The poll had to be countermanded in three assembly constituencies inWest Bengal, namely, 127-Dum Dum assembly constituency, 250-Ukhra(S.C.) assembly constituency, and 129-Shampukur assembly constituency.

It will be remembered that at that time a wave of violence of unpre-cedented magnitude was sweeping over West Bengal. In those fatefulmonths, West Bengal was trembling under a reign of terror, the like ofwhich did not occur in living memory. The candidate Shri Pijush ChandraGhosh [INC(O)] one of the contesting candidates in 127-Dum Dum as-sembly constituency was murdered on 5th March, 1971. So also thePresident of the Forward Bloc, Shri Hemanta Kumar Basu, one of thecontesting candidates of 129-Shampukur assembly constituency wasmurdered in broad day light on 20th February, 1971. He was an oldman of 75 years of age and respected by everybody irrespective of partyaffiliation. After his death, the poll was countermanded and in the freshelection, Shri Ajit Kumar Biswas was nominated as a candidate by theForward Bloc. Then Shri Debdatta Mondal, a third candidate contestingthe assembly election from 250-Ukhra (SC) on the Bangla Congress ticketwas also murdered by violent elements on the 17th February, 1971,necessitating the countermand of the poll in this constituency also. Freshelections were ordered and the date of poll was fixed on the 6th June,1971. But unfortunately the poll in Shampukur assembly constituencycould not be held because Shri Ajit Kumar Biswas who was nominatedafter the murder of Shri Hemanta Kumar Basu was also murdered onthe 28th May, 1971, necessitating a second countermand of the poll inthat constituency. Thus in quick succession as many as four contestingcandidates were murdered at the time of the Fifth General Election,to the Lok Sabha in 1971. No fresh election how-ever, could be held after Shri Ajit Kumar Biswas's murder because in themeantime the West Bengal Assembly was dissolved by the Governor ofWest Bengal on the 25tlTjune, 1971.

THE POLL 91

It is because of these extremely abnormal conditions prevailing in WestBengal at the time of the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha thatthere was a strong demand from several quarters including a number ofinfluential newspapers that the elections in West Bengal should be postponed.It is precisely because of this serious situation prevailing in West Bengalthat the Commission had to fix the date of poll in West Bengal on the10th of March, 1971, that is, three-four days after the completion of thepoll in other States so that the police force in adequate number might bedrafted from those States in West Bengal to guard the polling stations andthe polling personnel as well as the electorate. The military was broughtin at that time in West Bengal to patrol the streets, lanes and byelanes ofCalcutta and also a few days before the poll in the rural areas in the State.But self-seeking persons long after the poll and the declaration of the resultsof the elections were over raised the allegation that the Commission hadintentionally fixed the date of poll in West'Bengal on the 10th of March tocarry out its nefarious design of chemical treatment of ballot papers andmarking the same by some mechanical process. Can extreme and sordidself-interest go beyond this? It is for the right thinking members of thepublic to judge.

CHAPTER VIII

THE COUNTING OF VOTES AND THE DECLARATION OF RESULTS

1. "Process of Counting—Before beginning to count the votes thereturning officer is to open the ballot boxes, count and record thenumber of papers in each box, so as to check any attempt atfraud, and then mix all the ballot papers together in such a waythat it may not be known which papers came out of any parti-cular ballot box (Rule 34)."

— Paragraph 42 of the Memorandumissued by the Home Office, WhiteHall, the 24th July, 1872, giving theprincipal provisions of the Ballot Act,1872 and the rules made thereunder(vide British Parliamentary PapersGovernment Elections, Vol. V, Sessions1870-98 — Irish University PressSeries, Page 407):

2. "Before the returning officer proceeds to count the votes, heshall —(a) in the presence of the counting agents open each ballot boxand taking out the ballot papers therein count and record thenumber thereof and in the presence of the election agents verifyeach ballot paper account;

(b) count such of the postal ballot papers as have been dulyreturned and record the number counted; and

(c) then mix together the whole of the ballot papers mentioned inthe foregoing paragraphs."

[Rule 46(1) of the ParliamentaryElection Rules contained in the secondSchedule to the U.K. Representationof the People Act, 1949.]

3. "The returning officer shall open or cause to be opened, simul-taneously the ballot box or boxes used at more than one pollingstation and shall have the total number of ballot papers found insuch box or boxes counted and recorded in Part II of Form 16."

[Rule 55(1) of the Conduct of Elec-tions Rules, 1961.]

"Subject to such general or special directions, if any, as may begiven by the Election Commission in this behalf, the ballot paperstaken out of all boxes used in a constituency shall be mixedtogether and then arranged in convenient bundles and scrutinised. .

92

THE COUNTING OF VOTES AND THE DECLARATION 93OF RESULTS

Explanation. — For the purpose of this rule, the expression"constituency" shall, in relation to an election from a parliamentaryconstituency, mean the assembly constituency comprised therein."

[Rule 56(1) and the Explanationthereto of the Conduct of ElectionsRules, 1961.]

4. "And in the organisation for counting votes in a democracy, afundamental distinction appears between the system of governmentand the Government of the day. If the Government of the day,that is to say, the particular persons in control, whose actionsare to be judged by the voter has power over the counting of votes,no confidence can exist among voters as to the results published.Therefore, there must be some institution of government whichcarries on the administration independently of the policy of thisor that political group in control at the moment Hence the needfor a civil service whose members are not removable solely at thewill of the Government of the day."

— Delisle Burns, Democracy, page124.

With the completion of the poll in the State of West Bengal on the10th March, 1971, the polling period which started on the 1st March, 1971,came to an end. On that very day i.e., the 10th March, 1971, the countingof votes started everywhere throughout the country except in West Bengalat 8.00 a.m. This arrangement was made with a view to ensuring that theresults of counting in any of the States and Union territories might notinfluence the voting in West Bengal. The Commission received representa-tions from political parties and ex-Members of Parliament also that if theresult of the counting in any constituency in any part of India was an-nounced before the close of the poll in West Bengal, it might affect thepolling in that State. A little more time in the counting of votes was likelyto be taken because of the introduction of the new counting procedure bythe mixing of ballot papers, after the initial count, found in the ballot boxesused at all the polling stations within an assembly constituency comprisedin the parliamentary constituency concerned. To ensure that any announce-ment of the indication of the counting or any declaration of the result ofany election in any part of the country might not influence the voting trendin West Bengal, requests were made to the All-India Radio and to the Pressthrough Press Information Bureau, not to publish the results of counting oreven the trend of counting in any constituency before 5.00 p.m. on the 10thMarch, 1971. The All-India Radio, the P.I.B. and the Press in generalwere good enough to comply with this request and I take this opportunityof expressing the Commission's thankfulness to all of them.

Serious objections have been taken to the introduction of the newcounting procedure under which the ballot papers of all the ballot boxesused at polling stations within an assembly constituency are required to beput in a big bin or receptacle and mixed together before starting the sorting,scrutiny and counting of ballot papers. All sorts of motives were attributed

94 THE COUNTING OF VOTES AND THE DECLARATIONOF RESULTS

to the Commission for the introduction of this new procedure but shortlyafter the dissolution of the Lok Sabha the Commission started receivingletters and representations, some times signed and some times anonymous,from the members of the public. The Commission thought carefully overthe matter for a number of days and then decided to introduce the newcounting procedure which was exactly on the pattern of the countingprocedure which has been in vogue in Great Britain for full onecentury if not more. At the beginning of the Chapter the provisions relatingto mixing of ballot papers in Great Britain in 1872, have already beenquoted. In great Britain, today also the same counting procedure is followedalthough there is no casteism or communalism and threat and intimidationof the weaker sections of the community are almost totally absent, at elec-tions in Great Britain today. Still, their Election Law provides for themixing of ballot papers before they are actually sorted, scrutinised andcounted. The object which underlies the system of voting by secret ballotis also the object which impelled the Commission to introduce the newcounting procedure^ It is the elimination of intimidation of voters. AsDelisle Burns says, —

"The vote, under a democratic system,for the election of members of arepresentative Assembly, is by secretballot. The voter thus escapes intimi-dation."

("Democracy" Page 124)

But it has been said that this new procedure was introduced with a view tomaking the mischief of chemical treatment of ballot papers and the mecha-nical process of voting fool proof because according to those who madethis allegation, there was no possibility of reshuffling and rearranging theballot papers polling stationwise once the mixing had been done. There can-not be anything further from the truth and more perverse than this mischie-vious allegation. In a subsequent Chapter it will be shown that even after themixing, without any difficulty, ballot papers can be rearranged polling sta-tion-wise, just as in card playing it is not at all difficult to reshuffle the variousplaying cards in their respective classes.

Be that as it may, detailed instructions were prepared in the Commissionin very simple language so that the counting staff might easily follow themin counting the votes according to the new procedure. Not only that,,demonstrations of the new procedure were held at various places throughoutthe country before the returning officers, assistant returning officers and othermembers of the election staff. As a matter of fact, the credit goes to theelection staff throughout the country that the counting was done, by andlarge, quite correctly and efficiently in accordance with the new procedurethroughout the country and practically no complaint was received from anyquarter on this account. Even recount was made successfully without diffi-culty in a number of places. It is no doubt true, however, that a little moretime was taken in some counting places in completing the counting becauseof this new procedure but now the counting staff throughout the countryhave got used to this new procedure and at the Fifth General Election tothe Legislative Assemblies in March, 1972, counting was done within


shorter periods of time. It is not necessary to dilate on this matter ingreater detail here.

Counting of votes is done in this country invariably by permanentofficers of the Government. On no occasion any temporary employee inthe service of the government or any employee of any local authority orany commercial or business undertaking is ever employed for the countingof votes.

The counting of votes and the declaration of results throughout thecountry was over by the 15th March, 1971. The last declaration of theresult was in Tamil Nadu from 38-Tiruchendur parliamentary constituency.On the very same day a notification under section 73 of the Representationof the People Act, 1951 was issued by the Election Commission and uponthe issue of this notification, a new House of the People was duly constitutedpaving the way for the President of India to summon the new House andfor the Government to present the budget for the new financial year beforethe expiry of the current financial year on the 31st March, 1971. Onthe 15th March, 1971, the Chief Election Commissioner formally sent tothe Speaker of the House of the People a list containing the names of allthe elected members as notified in the Gazette of India with a covering letterwhich was as follows :—

"ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIANo. 308/71

ToThe Speaker of the House of the People,Parliament House,New Delhi.

Sir,The President of India by three notifications, issued respectively on

the 27th January, the 1st February and 3rd February, 1971, was pleased tocall upon all the 518 parliamentary constituencies to elect members in ac-cordance with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,and of the rules and orders made thereunder, for the purpose of constitutinga new House of the People.

The results of the elections in all the parliamentary constituenciesexcept three have been declared by the respective returning officers. Theresult of the election in the parliamentary constituency comprising the Unionterritory of Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands, has been declaredunder the provisions of section 53, and the results of the elections in therest have been declared under the provisions of section 66, of the Repre-sentation of the People Act, 1951.

In one parliamentary constituency, namely, 21-Nagpur parliamentaryconstituency in the State of Maharashtra the poll could not be taken onthe date originally fixed as the poll had to be countermanded under


section 52 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, on account ofthe death of one of the contesting candidates. In two Parliamentaryconstituencies, namely, 2-Mandi parliamentary constituency in the Stateof Himachal Pradesh and 4-Ladakh parliamentary constituency in theState of Jammu & Kashmir, the poll could not be taken on the datesoriginally fixed on account of weather conditions and therefore the timefor completion of the elections had to be extended under the provisionsof section 153 of the aforesaid Act.

Under section 73 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,there have been notified by the Election Commission today in the Gazetteof India the names of the members elected from all the Parliamentaryconstituencies, except the three mentioned above, and immediately uponsuch notification the new House of the People has been duly constituted.

I have the honour to present to you. Sir, the list containing the namesof all the elected members as notified today in the Gazette of India.

Yours faithfully,

New Delhi; S. P. SEN-VARMA15th March, 1971 Chief Election Commissioner

of India."

As already mentioned the poll in 21-Nagpur parliamentary consti-tuency in the State of Maharashtra could not be taken on the dateoriginally fixed as the poll had to be countermanded under section 52 ofthe Representation of the People Act, 1951, on account of the death ofone of the contesting candidates. In two parliamentary constituencies,namely, 2-Mandi parliamentary constituency in the State of HimachalPradesh and 4-Ladakh parliamentary constituency in the State of Jammu& Kashmir, the poll could not be taken on the dates originally fixed onaccount of weather conditions and therefore the time for completion ofthe elections had to be extended under the provisions of section 153 ofthe aforesaid Act. Barring these three constituencies, elections had beenheld in the remaining 515 parliamentary constituencies. Of these, in onlyone constituency, namely, in the parliamentary constituency comprisingthe Union territory of Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands, therewas. as already mentioned, no contest and the only candidate was declaredunopposed under section 53 of the Representation of the People Act,1951. The following tables show the candidates of various politicalparties as well as independent candidates who were returned in the FifthGeneral Election to the Lok Sabha by polling:—

(1) more than 50% of the votes polled;(2) 40% to 50% of the votes polled;(3) 30% to 40%. of the votes polled; and(4) 20% to 30% of the votes polled.

No candidate was elected who polled 10% to 20% of the total vote?polled.

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position —According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates d

wo

ALL STATES AND UNION TERRITORIES TOTAL SLATS : 518 c

z% TNC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL o

Seat Parly O

won O_ JO H

" "" rrt fn1 • 2 3 4 5 6 7 ' 8 9 10 11 12 13 | ^

-j 2

M o r e than 5 0 % . . . 262 11 11 5 1 . . 11 5 40 . . S 354 5

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . 61 3 9 2 . . 2 S 13 8 . . 3 109 gri

30%—40% 23 2 2 1 1 4 6 4 . . 2 45 >

20% - 3 0 % . . . 6 1 . . 1 1 . . 1 10 5c

10%—20% .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . , . *.

0%—10% . . . . .

TOTAL: . . . 352 16 22 8 3 2 23 25 53 . . 14 518MO- J

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 Jg

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates

STATE—ANDHRA PRADESH TOTAL SEATS: 41.-ii-im, mnnn w I I I W H — ^ B IIII « mmm n w - 11 mni^mrMiri---i—rrJi«ujji]imi.j_iiim HIIIIM • • iiimnin mi »-iirnfw™-ni—*r—~— MTPMIJW-"""! ii •»iim»i MII • i n WIHIIIIIIMIIIIIMWM I I aim M I I H HI IIIIIUMIIII • • • * H

% INC(J) I N C ( N ) BJS S W A SSP PSP C P l C P M O T H E R S I N D T O T A L ffl

Seat Party O

w o n Z^ ^

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 §

_ O

More than 5 0 % . . . 27 1 6 TPS 1 35 o ^

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . 3 TPS 3 ^ S

30%—40% . ' . . 1 1 1 TPS 3 S w

2 0 % - 3 0 % . . . ' %%

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . M H

0 % — 1 0 % . . . W

T O T A L : . . . 2 8 . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 1 0 T P S 1 4 1 p

- 2I

GENERAL FXECTIONS—1971

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—ASSAM TOTAL SEATS : 14 §j

% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL O

Seat Party Hwon ^

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 o °T)

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 11 1 A P H L C 12 w °

4 0 % - 5 0 % . . . 2 2 ^ w

30%—40% w z

o20%-30% H

10%—20% w/o— i U /o m

^__^^^_^^^^_ ^^_^__ o- — -- f-*

TOTAL : . . 13 1 APHLC 14 %>O

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 —©

o

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage of Voles polled by Elected Candidates

STATE—BIHAR TOTAL SEATS : 53.. . _ H

% 1NC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL taSeat Party Owon §

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 o O '

More than 50% . . . 17 1 2 20 « <

40%—50% . . . 12 1 2 1 JKP 16 r H

30%—40% . . . 7 2 1 1 1 j 1 3 M w

20%—30% . . . 3 1 4 S

10%-20% H

0%—10% S

TOTAL : . . . 39 3 2 2 5 1 JKP 1 53 |

>

O

z


w HOUSE OF THF. PEOPLEm - '_O Party position—According to percentage of Votes Polled by Elected Candidates

f STATE-GUJARAT TOTAL SEATS : 24 %OC ._ . -

% INC(.I) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP . PSP CP1 CPM OTHERS FND TOTAL 8c

Seat Party 2jwon Z

_ .. ___ O1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 1 2 1 3 o °

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 8 9 1 1 8 " 5

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . 3 2 ' 5 r "H >

30%—40% . • . 1 ] M g

20%—30% H

10%—20% t=

0%—10% - - °

T O T A L : . . . 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 ? =

' ' • _ 5

o

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 g

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—Aceerding to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates

STATE—HARYAN4 TOTAL SEATS : 9 H

% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL w

nSeat Party §won 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 O, , -—.__ m Q

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 5 5 § <

% - 5 3 % . . . 2 1 1 V H P 4 g g

30%-40% C >

20%-30% « O

' 10%—20% a

%-10% W

_ _ _ ^ ~ , . - _ _ _ _ _ __„__„„ a

TOTAL : . . . 7 1 1 VHP 9 P. - - - *• ~ - • —• - — = • — pj

>


HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party posititn—According to percentage of Votes polled byjElected Candidates

H

STATE—HIMACHAL PRADESH TOTAL SEATS: 4 »*

8% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL Sj

Seat Party pwon

- ______ _ ^

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 >d oCO H

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . . 4 4 H >en Z

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . o

3 0 % - 4 0 % . . . . g

2 0 % - 3 0 % . . . . £1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . ^

o % - i o % . . . . > -t , ___.™______™ „_ , 3*-

TOTAL: 4 4 O

GENERAL ELECTIONS- 1971 o

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—JAMMU & KASHMIR TOTAL SEATES: 6 H

aa

% TNC(J) INC BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS TND TOTAL 8(N) S

Seat "• Party 3won SJ

_.._ _ _._. g o1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ^ O

- • - — - I sM o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 5 1 6 r - g

M en4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . * >

3 0 % _ 4 0 % . . . . §

20 V 30 V H

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . w

a" /o J U /o • . . . . Q

t^

TOTAL : 5 - 1 6 >

~ • " " ~ o• . . . . - . . . . . . • . . . . z

GENERAL ELECTIONS-1971

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected CandidatesX

STATE—KERALA ' TOTAL SEATS: 19 W

oo

% JNC(J) INC- BJS SWA " SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL H(N) 5

Seat Party Owon O

__ O *<

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 g Q' _ _ _ _ »«

_ _ _ _ . . „ - . . . __ ^ c *

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . . 5 2 1 2 M U L 1 1 6 m g3 K E C2 R S P d

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . 1 1 1 3 w

3 0 % - 4 0 % . • g

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . • ' . . , . "

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . >

0 % — 1 0 % . . . . g

TOTAL : 6 3 2 7(2) MUL 1 19(3) KEC(2) RSP ^

: _ O

GENERAL ELECTIONS-1971 _o

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—MADHYA PRADESH TOTAL SEATS: 37 ^X

' to

INC(J) INC- BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL g% ' (N) • C

Seat rty 3won 2»

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ^ §w <

c °.M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . . 1 7 8 1 3 2 9 £ H

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . 4 3 7 M >

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . . ' o

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . 1 1 g

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . . e n

af / 0 1U /o . . . . Q

, ^__ M_ _ ___^ . __ _̂___ _>__ .-..__- - . „ „ , . ^

TOTAL 21 11 1 4 37 S

2

GENERAL ELECTrON-1971

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—MAHARASHTRA TOTAL SEATS: 45 g

. g% INC(J) INC- BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL §

(N) . HSeat ^ L Party Zwon ^

_ , O

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 -o <

_ __ * sM o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 3 7 1 3 8 p >

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . 5 1 6 S i |

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . . 1 F B L 1 H

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . . w

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . w

0 % - 1 0 % . . . . ^, , : . >

T O T A L . . . . 4 2 1 2 R P G 4 5 R

FBL I

o

GENERAL ELECTIONS-1971 300

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—MYSORE TOTAL SEATS : 27 S

1NC(J) INC- BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM Others IND TOTAL O% (N) §

Seat Party Hwon 2

_ O °1 2 3 4 5 6 ' 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 '50 °

_ • _ _ _ • _ _ • _ „ ta .

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 2 7 2 7 £ °

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . « w

3 0 % - 4 0 % . . . I2 0 % - 3 0 % . H

. 1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . ' . w

0 % — 1 0 % . . . . g

. i p ^ . : n

TOTAL . . • 27 • 27 >__ _ ._ >

" ' • • ' • " • • • • 3

GENERAL ELE CTIONS--1971

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage oj Votes polled by Elected CandidatesH

STATE—NAGALAND • TOTAL SEATS : 1 g' n

Others O% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM IND TOTAL S

Scat Parly Hwon _?

_ O

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 o §_ _ TJ

fa OM o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 1 UFN 1 gj ^

4 0 % - 5 0 % . . . . | £

3 0 % - 4 O % . . . . M |

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . H

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . w

o%—io% . • I. „ . , ,.„ .„ t™̂

TOTAL . . . . 1 UFN 1 %_ _ _ _ _ _ ^ _ _ • _ _ * "

O.

Ovo

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 —©

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—ORISSA TOTAL SEATS : 20_ *~i

~~ ~ " ' ' " " ~ " ~ is.Others w

% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA || SSP PSP CPI CPM — IND TOTAL oSeat Party Qwon §

_ • _ _ H

1 ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 |V *T\

"' " " ' " " • '" " " ~ " ~ " " . O

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 3 2 5 §

4 0 % — 5 0 » ; , . . . . 8 1 1 1 0 £ O

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . . 3 • . 1 U T C 4 w "

2 0 % — 3 0 ° ; 1 1 Za

10%—20»: H

0 % — 1 0 % . . . . Wo

T O T A L . . . . 1 5 3 1 , 1 U T C 2 0 £- ^ . . _ _ • ; >

"" " ^ ' ' ' "' " " ' ' ~ - < - - - — 73

H. 5

2,


HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidate* _lSTATE—PUNJAB TOTAL SEATS : 13 g

Others §% INC(J) 1NC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM —— IND TOTAL £

Seat Party 3won g

o1 2 3 4 5 ' 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 1 2 1 3 O

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 9 1 1 0 so S

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . 1 1 S A D 2 g " 1

3 0 % - 4 0 % . . . . • 1 ' ! S |

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . ^

a1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . t n

0 % — 1 0 % . . . . %

. . ,—_—. . ,—. .—_ ——. oTOTAL . . . . 10 2 1 SAD 13 £

!*

. ._ _. . .- . gI

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 ~

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—RAJASTHAN TOTAL SEATS : 23_ _ _ _ ^ _ H

" " ~ - • - • - - - • • • . . - - - - - . . . _ j ^

Others w

% INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM 1ND TOTAL nSeat Party °won 2;

^ • H

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 o O_ ; _. *u o

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . . 1 1 3 2 1 1 7 w ^

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . 3 1 1 1 6 r = H

3 0 % - 4 0 % . . . . • ' " ^

2 0 % - 3 0 % . . . . §

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . ffi

o % — 1 0 % . . . . w

, „___ . D

TOTAL . . . . 14 43 2 23 oL . _ • t-1

jo>

5


HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates.

STATE—TAMIL NADU TOTAL SEATS : 39 o '. O

INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS 1ND TO- §% TAL 2

Seat Party g

' ' w o n O— — - — " " - - - " - - • - — - " — - - - " • - • o • "

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 T> <

_ : g 3M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 9 1 3 2 2 D M K 3 6 | ™

1 F B L 3 r >

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . - . 1 1 D M K 1 • HZ

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . H

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . • w

1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . g

0 % - 1 0 % . . . P. ?3

T O T A L . . . 2 4 H9 1 4 (23) D M K 1 3 9 P

(1) F B L •*

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 ~4-.

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—UMAX PRADESH TOTAL SEATS : 85_______ | | | __ , „ *yj

INC(J) INQN) BJS SWA SSP PSPJXLCPI CPMj j OTHERS IND TOTAL W

• / !. ____________ OSeat Party gwon ^

1 2 3 4 5 6 - 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 O °_ ^ O

_ - , . . .. - -. _ - . ^ ^More than 50% . . . 53 2 1 56 5 <

40%—50% . . . 13 1 3 1 1 BKD 1 20 f_j g

30%—40% . . . 7 1 1 9 ^ >

20%~-30% . . . §

10%—20% . . . g

0 % - 1 0 % . . . ™o

, . wTOTAL 1 . . . 73 1 4 4 1 BKD 2 85 £

50" " ^ ' " ~ " ~ ~ " " • >

sz


HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—WEST BENGAL TOTAL SEATS : 40 H

INC(J) INC(N) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL "0/ ^/» , o

Seat Party Cwon H

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 °O O

_____ „ . ..,. __^_ : __^ . , .. _._ _ ^ _ _ . „______.__ .... „ hrt >TJ

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 3 4 7 go

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . 6 1 2 1 0 1 9 C «

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . 3 1 5 1 B A C 1 1 1 w ^

2 0 % — 3 0 % 1 1 1 R S P 3 °

1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . g

0 % - 1 0 % . . . go

, : t a j - | w

T O T A L . . . 1 3 1 3 2 0 2 B A C 1 4 0 j »RSP g

_ - ____ , . . , _ ^

GENERAL ELECTIONS—1971 £

HOUSE OF THE PEOPLE


STATE—UNION TERRITORIES TOTAL SEATS : 18 H_ _ _ _ ..._ ..... - . ... ... .. 3 -

._ - . , . - . - . .. - ~ - - - ^INC(J) INCW) BJS SWA SSP PSP CPI CPM OTHERS 1ND TO- n

% • TAL OSeat Par'.y 2won S

O1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 o

M o r e t h a n 5 0 % . . . 1 1 1 U G S 1 2 a o

4 0 % - 5 0 % . . . 1 2 3 c 5

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . 2 • 2 ^ §

2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . 1 ' 1 °

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . - w

0 % — 1 0 % . . . go

T O T A J . . . . 1 5 2 1 U G S 1 8 %_ _ >

- 9


From the above Tables it will appear that out of the total numberof elected candidates, namely, 518, as many as 354 were elected bypolling more than 50% of the votes. Of the total number of candidateselected on the tickets of the Indian National Congress led by Shri JagjivanRam, namely, 352, 262 obtained more than 50% of the votes, 61 ob-tained votes between 40%>—50%, 23 candidates obtained votes between30%—40% and 6 candidates obtained votes between 20%—30%.Of the total number of candidates elected on the tickets of the IndianNational Congress led by Shri Nijalingappa, 11 candidates obtained votesmore than 50%, 3 candidates obtained votes between 40%—50%, 2candidates obtained votes between 30%—40%. Of the total numberof candidates elected belonging to the Bhartiya Jan Sangh, namely, 22,11 obtained more than 50% votes, 9 obtained votes between 40%—50%

-and 2 obtained votes between 30%—40%. Of the 8 elected candidates1 belonging to the Swatantra jparty, 5 obtained more than 50% of thevotes, 2 obtained votes between 40%—50% and one obtained votes be-tween 30%—40%. Of the 3 S.S.P. candidates elected, one obtainedmore than 50% of the votes, one obtained votes between 30%—40%and one obtained votes between 20%—30%. Each of the two candi-dates elected on the P.S.P tickets obtained votes between 40%—50%.Of the 23 C.P.I, candidates elected, 11 polled more than 50% of thevotes. 8 obtained votes between 40%—50% and 4 obtained votesbetween 30%—40%. Of the 25 C.P.M. candidates elected, 5 obtainedrrjpre than 50% of the votes, 13 obtained votes between 40%—50%,6"obtained votes between 30%—40% and one obtained votes between20%—30%. Of the 53 candidates elected on the tickets of otherparties, 40 obtained more than 50% of the votes, 8 obtained votes between40%—50%, 4 obtained votes between 30%—40% and one obtainedvotes between 20%—30%. Of the 14 Independent candidates, 8 ob-trained more than 50% of the votes, 3 obtained votes between 40% —50%, 2 obtained votes between 30%—40% and one obtained votesbetween 20%—30%. Thus no candidate was elected by obtaining votesbetween 10%—20% or Jess. Of the total number of 518 elected candi-dates, 354 obtained more than 50 per cent of the votes polled, 109 obtainedvotes between 40%—50%, 45 obtained votes between 30%—40% andonly 10 obtained votes between 20%—30%.

The following short statement shows the total number of electors, totalnumber of votes polled, total number of valid votes polled, votes rejected,percentage of votes polled and the percentage of votes rejected at theFifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1971;—

1971-Lok Sabha General Election

Total No. Total No. of Total No. of Votes rejec- Percentage of Percentage ofof electors votes polled valid votes pol- ted votes polled votes rejected

led

27,43,33,925 15,14,93,463 14,65,78,675 49,19,738 55.22 3.24

3 EC/72—9.


The percentage of votes rejected is gradually coming down as shownbelow:—

Percentage ofvotes rejected

1. Third General Election to Lok Sabha, 1962 3.94

2. Fourth General Election to Lok Sabha, 1967 4.68

3. Fifth General Election to Lok Sabha, 1971 3.24

The break up State and Union territory-wise is shown below: —P E R C E N T A G E O F V O T E S R E J E C T E D I N T H E L A S T T H R E E G E N E R A L

E L E C T I O N S

A . States

1. A n d h r a Pradesh2. Assam . . . . .3. Bihar4 . Gujara t . . . .5. H a r y a n a . . . . .6. j a m m u & K a s h m i r7. Kera la8. M a d h y a Pradesh . . . .9. Tamil N a d u . . . .

10. M a h a r a s h t r a . . . .11 . Mysore . . . . .12. N a g a l a n d . . . . .13. Orissa . . . . .14. Punjab15. Ra jas than . . . . .16. Ut ta r P radesh . . . .17. West Bengal . . . .18. H i m a c h a l Pradesh19. M a n i p u r . . . . .20. Megha l sya2 1 . T r ipu ra . . . . .

B . Union terri tories

1. A n d a m a n & Nicoba r Is lands2. C h a n d i g a r h .3. D a d r a N a g a r Havel i4 . G o a , D a m a n & Diu5. Laccadive, Minicoy a n d Admindiv i

I s lands6. Delhi7. Pondicher ry . . . .8. M i z o r a m . . . . .9. A r u n a c h a l P radeshAll-India Percentage.

* U C — U n c o n t e s t e d

1962

3 .214 . 3 04 . 2 44 . 3 3

2 . 0 75 .683 . 2 44 . 8 84 . 6 6

4 . 8 83 . 4 64 . 1 14.243 .043 . 9 !0 . 0 6

1967

3 .895 .374 . 5 04 . 8 54 . 1 83 .383 .785 . 8 93 .045 .074 . 7 6

5 .954 . 5 53 .96

5 .153 .804 . 1 2 (U.T . )2 . 9 7 (U.T.)

2.30

3.32

3.94

2.61 (U.T.)

1.358.192.89

0.764.242.05

1971

2.594.741.924.242.484.290.985.893.723.323.430.074.922.063.202.554.313.082.16

3.65

0.011.525.993.06

U.C.*1.260.17

3.24


From the above table it appears that the largest percentage of rejectedvotes has all along been in the State of Madhya Pradesh. This is under-standable because a substantial segment of the population consists oftribal population most of whom are illiterate. Next in order come Orissa,Assam and Gujarat. In West Bengal the percentage in 1971(4.31%)is larger than the percentage in 1962 (3.94%) and in 1967 (3.80%).West Bengal is a highly politically conscious State. The reason for therise in the percentage of rejected voters in 1971 may be due to a largeextent to the reign of terror prevailing in West Bengal at the time ofthe 1971 general election to the Lok Sabha and the fear psychosis whichover took the people of West Bengal completely and perhaps cloudedtheir intelligent judgment at the time of voting. It is not at all unlikelythat they went to the polling stations and hurriedly put some voting markon the ballot paper and ran away quickly for their homes. The lowestpercentage of rejected votes in 1971 was in Nagaland (0.07%) andKerala (0.98%). The political consciousness is highly developed andpercentage of literacy is very high both in Nagaland and Kerala and thisexplains the very small percentage of rejected votes in these two States.One feature should be noted in this connection. The percentage of re-jected votes in most of the States and territories was higher in 1967 thannot only in 1971 but also in 1962.

The following statement shows in detail the percentage of men andwomen voters. This seems to be important as on no previous occasionhas any such detailed statement relating to the percentage of men andwomen voters been published:—


Statement showing the percentage of votes polled by men and women

1962

SI. Name of State/Union Terri-No. tory

', of votes polled % of votes polled

by men by women by total by men by womenvoters to voters to voters to voters to voters tomen elec- women total elec- total elec- total elec-tors electors tors tors tors

1

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.

8.9.

10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.

27.28.29.

2

A n d h r a P r a d e s h .A s s a m . . . .B i h a r . . . .G u j a r a t . . . .H a r y a n a . .J a m m u a n d K a s h m i r .K e r a l a . . . .M a d h y a P r a d e s h

Tamil NaduMaharashtra . . .M y s o r e . . . .N a g a l a n d . . . .O r i s s a . . . .P u n j a b . . . .R a j a s t h a n . . . .U t t a r P r a d e s h .W e s t B e n g a lH i m a c h a l P r a d e s hM a n i p u r . . . .

M e g h a l a y aT r i p u r a . . . .A n d a m a n & N i c o b a r I s l a n d sC h a n d i g a r hD a d r a & N a g a r H a v e l iG o a , D a m a n a n d D i u

3

69.0351.5055.3963.39

——

74.1060.3673.0766.0265.18

—

33.0765.9062.6359.4261.9843.6866.27

—

73.33——.——

L a c c a d i v e , M i n i c o y a n d A m i n d i v iI s l a n d s —•

D e l h i . . . .P o n d i c h e r r yM i z o r a m . . . . .

T O T A L :

65.82——

62.05

4

60.3437.2332.8652.02

——

67.0828.9064.5554.2953.07

—

13.2158.1341.3539.4647.6222.0464.44

—

61.77—.———.'

71.71—

—

46.63

5

64.7245.0944.8857.96

——

70.5544.7968.7760.4359.30

—

23.5662.3752.4450.3555.7533.6065.34

—

67.95————

68.29—

—

54.76

6

34.28.

29.33.

36.30.

36.34.33.

17.36.32.32352332

39

38

32

81355613——.6248

244752—

24.0260.43.11.35.61—

.24————

.14—

—

.68

7

29.9116.7415.3224.83

—.—

33.9314.3i32.5325.9625.78

—

6.3226.3519.8417.9220.6410.2532.73

—

28.72————

13.15—

—

22.08


voters etc. in the last three General Elections to the House of the People

1967 1971

% of votes polled % of votes polled % of votes polled % of votes polled

by men by wo- by total by men by wo- by men by wo- by total by men by wo-voters to men vo- voters voters men voters men vo- voters voters menmen elec- ters to to total to total voters to men ters to to total to total voterstors women electors electors to total electors women electors electors to total

electors electors electors electors

8

72.0866.5061.2869.1975.4157.2577.1364.3579.2368.8267.36

—

53.5673.4464.9659.2770.8857.9768.73

76.4579.2265.4280.05

9

65.2650.8340.7458.1769.4452.0874.2042 AS

73.9460.4958.34

—

33.0568.4351.0248.9660.1544.0565.80

72.9876.7765.2876.55

10

68.6759.2851.5363.7672.6255.1675.6453.4776.5664.7562.95

—

43.7071.1458.2754.5166.0351.2067.23

74.8478.4565.3678.29

11

36.0035.8632.2135.1240.0534.0737.9832.3239.2835.3834.38

—

27.8139.6433.7931.9338.8529.7733.75

41.0954.5138.6739.68

12

32.6723.4219.3228.6432.5721.0937.6621.1537.2829.3728.57

—

15.8931.5024.4822.5827.1821.4333.48

33.7523.9426.6938.61

13

64.3958.3760.0060.6167.7867.6165.7758.2474.4863.5461.7356.8251.8563.3660.0752.2364.7948.4453.37

65.0069.7262.7971.46

14

54.7141.5737.0150.1960.4846.5963.3037.5969.1756.1252.7150.3733.7455.8747.5038.8458.7433.3843.55

55.9172.3363.1168.06

15

59.5750.6949.1055.5964.3458.1264.5348 0071.8259.9457.4253.7743.2059.8954.0446.1062.1641.1848.35

60.8470.5562.9269.78

16

32.3131.6731.5730.8635.9437.0932.6929.3637.2132.7132.1929.5527.0734.0531.2728.3136.6725.1026.11

35.2947.5536.8436.25

17

27.2619.0217.5324.6328.4021.0331.8418.6434.6127.2325.2823.8216.1325.8422.7717.7925.4916.1822,24

25.5523.0026.0833.53

69.35 67.42 68.37 33.97 34.40 57.01 54.91 55.92 27.73 28.1978.27 86.16 82.02 41.04 40.98 (UNCONTESTED)

6876

66

.91

.01

.73

7073

55

.25.72

.48

69.4974.85

61.33

3937

34

.00.41

.72

30.4937.44

26.61

6671

61

.81

.93

.00

63.2968.28

49.15

65.70.

55.

1810

35

36.1035.83

31.94

2934

23

.08

.27

.41

PART-II

FIFTH GENERAL ELECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLIES—1972

123

CHAPTER IX

GENERAL ELECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLIES

1. "In framing the constitution, care should be taken to avoid themistakes and weaknesses of the United States' system, the primary errorof which was the reservation to the different States of all powers notdelegated to the Central Government. We must reverse this process byestablishing a strong central Government, to which shall belong all powersnot specially conferred on the provinces."

—Pope, Memoirs of Sir Johan A. Macdonald, Vol. I, page 269,quoted in Dawson's "The Governemnt of Canada" (FourthEdition), page 3d.

2. "Every Legislative Assembly of every State, unless sooner dissolved,shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meetingand no longer and the expiration of the said period of five years shalloperate as a dissolution of the Assembly."

—Article 172(1) of the Constitution. ,

3. "The Governor may from time to time

(b) dissolve the Legislative Assembly."—Article 174(2) of the Constitution.

4. "If the President on receipt of a report from the Governor of aState or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which thegovernment of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the pro-visions of this Constitution, the President may by Proclamation—•

(a) assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Govern-ment of the State and all or any of the powers vested in orexercisable by the Governor or any body or authority in theState other than the Legislature of the State;

(b) declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shallbe exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament;"—Article 356(1) of the Constitution.

The Fifth General Elections to the Legislative Assemblies of 18 Statesand Union territories and the Metropolitan Council of Delhi were heldduring the first quarter of this year, i.e., 1972. The States which wentto the polls for constituting new Legislative Assemblies are—

1. Andhra Pradesh2. Assam

125

126 GENERAL ELECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLIES

3. Bihar4. Gujarat5. Haryana6. Madhya Pradesh7. Maharashtra8. Mysore9. Punjab

10. Rajasthan11. West Bengal12. Jammu & Kashmir13. Himachal Pradesh14. Meghalaya15. Manipur, and16. Tripura.

Of these 16 States, President's rule under article 356 of the Consti-tution was in force in the States of Bihar, Gujarat, Mysore, Punjab, WestBengal, Manipur and Tripura. Though the President's rule in theseStates might have been continued for a longer period, it was decided bythe Central Government that general elections to constitute new Legis-lative Assemblies in these States should be held simultaneously with thegeneral elections to other States Legislative Assemblies whose normal lifeof five years was going to expire within a short time and the ElectionCommission received requests from the Central Government that theCommission should make arrangements for holding general elections inthese States accordingly.

There appears to be an impression in some quarters that when as aresult of Presidential rule imposed in a State under article 356, its Legis-lative Assembly is dissolved, the Election Commission can at any timehold a general election for constituting a new Legislative Assembly. Thisis quite wrong for the following reasons. In the first place, a Proclamationunder article 356 may be continued for a maximum period of three yearswith six monthly approval by the Houses of Parliament; and the Govern-ment may decide that it should be continued for the maximum periodbecause it may be of the opinion that the situation which necessitated theissue of the Proclamation still continues in the State. And this opinionof the Central Government is final; it cannot be agitated in any forumexcept on the floor of the Houses of Parliament. This is why six monthlyapproval of the Proclamation by Parliament is necessary. In the secondplace, if the Election Commission decides in a strong-headed and per-verse manner that a general election should be held inspite of Govern-ment's opinion to the contrary, the Commission will not be in a positionTO give effect to such decision. The Governor of the State will not acceptsuch perverse decision of the Commission; he will not accept the recom-mendation of the Commission under section 15 of the Representation ofthe People Act, 1951 and will not issue the writ for the general electionunder that section. The Government will not at all cooperate with the

GENERAL ELECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLIES 127

Commission and will not provide the necessary polling personnel forconducting the poll and the necessary police personnel for maintaininglaw and order during the election. The Election Commission was neverintended by the framers of the Constitution to be such an autocratic andperverse authority. It must not be forgotten that our Constitution is aConstitution of checks and balances so that no authority or agency can actin utter disregard of other authorities and agencies. In the third place,suppose a general election is held against the will of the Central Govern-ment, then, in such a case, the new Legislative Assembly which has beenconstituted will be ineffective because the powers of the Legislature ofthe State are exercisable by or under the authority of the Parliamentwhile the Proclamation under article 356 is in operation. Therefore, theholding of a general election and the constitution of the new LegislativeAssembly would hardly be of any practical utility.

The Union territories in which general elections were held to consti-tute their new Legislative Assemblies are Union territory of Goa, Damanand Diu and the new Union territory of Mizoram where the generalelection was held a little later than the general elections in the other 18States and Union territories. Whereas the general dections in the 18 Statesand Union territories were completed by the second week of March, 1972,the general election in the new Union territory of Mizoram to constitute thefirst Legislative Assembly of that Union territory was completed by aboutthe middle of April, 1972.

The general election to the Metropolitan Council of the Union terri-tory of Delhi was held simultaneously with the general elections to theLegislative Assemblies of the States and Union territories mentionedabove.

No general elections to constitute new Legislative Assemblies wereheld in the States of Kerala, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh andNagaland. As the existing Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh wasconstituted by a general election held in the beginning of 1969, and asthere was no President's rule, that Legislative Assembly is still functioningand no general election was necessary in the beginning of 1972. Thegeneral election to constitute the existing Legislative Assembly of Keralawas held in September, 1970 and it is still functioning. The general elec-tions to constitute the existing Legislative Assemblies of Orissa and TamilNadu were held simultaneously with the Fifth General Election to theLok Sabha in 1971. At that time a general election was held to consti-tute a new Legislative Assembly for West Bengal but within a few monthsafter the due constitution of the West Bengal Assembly President's rulewas clamped in that State and therefore another general election was heldin the beginning of 1972. No general election was held in the State ofNagaland to constitute a new Legislative Assembly as the existing Assemblywhich is now functioning in Nagaland was constituted by a generalelection held in March, 1969. Although the normal duration of five yearsof the Legislative Assembly of Haryana which was constituted by thegeneral election held in May, 1968, would have expired only some timein June, 1973, still the Government of Haryana decided to dissolve theLegislative Assembly and go in for a fresh general election together withthe general elections in the other States and Union territories mentionedabove. <v


The total number of elective seats in the various Legislative Assembliesincluding the Metropolitan Council of Delhi but excluding the LegislativeAssembly of Mizoram about which a brief reference will be made lateron because the election to that Legislative Assembly was held about amonth later, was 2,727. The break up was as follows:—

State

1. Andhra Pradesh .2. Assam3. Bihar4. Gujarat5. Haryana6. Jammu & Kashmir7. Madhya Pradesh8. Maharashtra9. Mysore

10. Punjab11. Rajasthan .12. West Bengal13. Himachal Pradesh14. Manipur15. Meghalaya16. Tripura

Union Territories:

1. Goa, Daman & Diu2. Delhi

Total No. Reserved Reservedof seats for Sche- for Sche-

duled duledCastes Tribes

Total

287114318168817529627021610418428068606060

3056

2,727

4084511156391529233155161—6

7

347

11142922——61162—

21163195019

—

283

Shortly after the Fifth General Election toLokSabha in 1971, was over,the Election Commission issued directions and instructions for the commence-ment of intensive revision of the electoral rolls throughout the country byreference to the 1st January, 1971, as the qualifying date. An innovationwas introduced in connection with the revision of the electional rolls. It wasdecided that to make the rolls as accurate as possible, the enumerators whileenumerating the number of electors in every household should prepare anelectoral card in duplicate for every such household and the enumeratorconcerned should sign each card and get it signed also by the head of thehousehold or some other senior member thereof, who was required to makea declaration on the card itself that the particulars including the namesof persons belonging to the household as given by him and recorded on thecard by the enumerator were true to the knowledge of such head of senior


member of the household. If any such declaration turns out to be false, theperson making such declaration is punishable with imprisonment which mayextend to one year or with fine or with both under section 31 of the Repre-sentation of the People Act, 1950. One copy of the electoral card shouldthereafter be given to the head of the household or the senior member, asthe case may be. The introduction of this new system greatly improved thequality of the electoral rolls and the number of electors throughout the countryshowed a substantial increase. Thus the total number of electors in the Statesand Union Territories which went to the poll in March, 1972 was19,52,72,629 as against—

(a) 18,32,54,850 in 1971;

(b) 16,82,13,057 in 1967; and

(c) 14,60,90,640 in 1962.

The total electorate in the States and Union Territories at the time of 1972Assembly elections registered an increase of—

(i) 6.56% over the electorate in 1971;

(ii) 16.09% over the electorate in 1967; and

(iii) 33.67% over the electorate in 1962.

To supervise the work of revision in accordance with this new mode theChief Election Commissioner and a number of senior officials of the Commis-sion visited large number of urban and rural areas in a number of Statessuch as Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra,Orissa etc. The Commission found that the people in the rural areas were,by and large, more enthusiastic in the matter of inclusion of their names inthe electoral rolls. Large number of rural electors came out before theChief Election Commissioner with their electoral cards in hands to showthe same to him. Rural areas in the remote interior of States sometimes40—50 miles away from the State capitals were visited by the Chief ElectionCommissioner and the officials of the Commission. It is gratifying to notethat while checking the electoral rolls the Chief Election Commissioner andthe members of the staff who accompanied him could rind very few mistakesin the rolls as revised in accordance with the new system.

The next important item relating to the elections was the preparation ofthe lists of polling stations and getting them approved by the Election Com-mission under section 25 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951,after the draft lists had been discussed by the District Election Officers con-cerned with the representatives of the political parties and candidates. Thetotal number of polling stations set up in the 18 States and Union Territorieswas 2,69,068 and the total number of polling personnel consisting of presid-ing and polling officers to man these polling stations was about 14 lakhsapproximately. The break up of the polling stations in these 18 States andUnion Territories at the time of the Fifth General Election to Lok Sabha in


1971, and at the time of the Fifth General Election to State Legislative As-semblies in 1972 as well as the increase in the number of polling stations,are shown in the table below:

GENERAL ELECTIONS TO STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLIES,1972.

NUMBER OF POLLING STATIONS SET IN MARCH,1972 AS COMPARED TO THE NUMBER OF POLLING STA-TIONS AT THE GENERAL ELECTION TO THE LOK SABHA,1971.

Name of States/Union territories

1. Andhra Pradesh .2. Assam . .3. Bihar4. Gujarat5. Haryana6. Himachal Pradesh7. Jammu & Kashmir8. Madhya Pradesh9. Maharashtra

10. Meghalaya11. Mysore12. Manipur13. Punjab14. Rajasthan .J5. Tripura16. West Bengal17. Delhi18. Goa, Daman & Diu

1971

27,928

7,808

36,487

14,737

5,570

2,825

3,094

25,728

33,124

. (Part of Assam)

• . . 21,433

8368,176

16,412

1,060

27,237

2,166

581

1972

29,721

8,429

47,700

17,994

6,189

3,364

3,859

31,079

34,052

56725,843

1,020

8,612

18,611

1,125

27,946

2,351

606

Increase

1,793

62111,213

3,257

619539765

5,351

928567

4,410

184436

2,199

65709.

18525

Total : 2,35,202 2,69,068 33,866

The total polling period this time was just one week from the 5th March(Sunday) to the 11th March (Saturday), 1972 (both days inclusive). Theprincipal reason for this was a general improvement in the law and ordersituation throughout the country including West Bengal where peaceful con-ditions prevailed barring a few constituencies in and around Calcutta and afew constituencies in the District of Burdwan.

The poll was taken on a single day in 7 States and Union territories, andin each of these States and Union territories the writ notifications were issuedon the same day, namely, on 4th February, 1972 (Friday). The poll wastaken on two days in 6 States, on three days in 4 States and on four daysin only one State, namely, the State of Bihar. For each of these States thewrit notifications were issued on the 1st February, 1972 (Tuesday). The dates


and the programme in these categories are shown in the statement below:

DATES OF POLL IN VARIOUS STATES AND UNION TER-RITORIES AND VARIOUS STAGES OF ELECTIONS—GENE-RAL ELECTIONS, 1972.

ONE DAY POLL

1. Meghalaya 9th March, 19722. Punjab 11th March, 19723. West Bengal 11th March, 19724. Dslhi (Metropolitan Council) . . . 11th March, 19725. Goa, Daman & Diu 11th March, 19726. Haryana 11th March, 19727. Tripura 11th March, 1972

Election Programme in these seven States and Union territories :

(a) Date of issue of the writ calling the generalelection: 4-2-72 (Friday)

(b) Last date for nominations: . . . 11-2-72 (Friday)(c) Scrutiny of nominations: . . . . 12-2-72 (Saturday)(d) Withdrawal of candidatures: . . . 14-2-72 (Monday)(e) Date of poll (as indicated above).(f) Date for completion of elections: . . 17-3-72 (Friday)

TWO DAYS POLL

Dates of Poll

1. Andhra Pradesh 5th & 8th March, 19722. Assam 7th & 11th March, 19723. Gujarat 5th & 8th March, 19724. Himachal Pradesh 5th & 8th March, 19725. Madhya Pradesh 8th & 11th March, 19726. Mysore 5th & 9th March, 1972

THREE DAYS POLL1. Maharashtra 5th, 7th & 9th March, 19722. Manipur 6th, 9th & 11th March, 19723. Rajasthan 6th, 9th & 11th March, 19724. Jammu & Kashmir 8th, 9th & 11th March, 1972

FOUR DAYS POLL

1. Bihar 5th, 7th, 9th & 11th March, 1972

Election Programme in these eleven States :

(a) Date of issue of writ: . . . . 1-2-72 (Tuesday)(b) Last date for nominations: . . . 8-2-72 (Tuesday)(c) Scrutiny of nominations: . . . . 9-2-72 (Wednesday)(d) Withdrawal of candidatures: . . . 11-2-72 (Friday)(e) Di teofpo l l . . . . . . (as indicated above)(f) Date of completion of elections: . . 17-3-72 (Friday)


Another innovation of great practical importance introduced at the timeof 1972 general elections to the Legislative Assemblies was ballot papers withcounterfoils. As early as on the 18th June, 1971, the following Circular letterwas issued to all the Chief Electoral Officers for this purpose :—•

"No.52/71(Gen.)ELECTION COMMISSION

OF INDIA

Talkatora Road,New Delhi-It

Dated the 18th June, 1971Jyaistha 28, 1893 (SAKA)

ToThe Chief Electoral Officers of all States and Union Territories.

Subject:—Ballot papers-Revised design with counterfoils

I am directed to refer to the proceedings at pages 7 and 8 of the ChiefElctoral Officers' Conference held on the 27th March, 1971 in New Delhi,forwarded with the Commission's letter No. 505/71(2), dated the 31 stMarch, 1971, regarding change in the design of ballot paper. After care-fully considering the views of the Chief Electoral Officers and the Superin-tendents of the State Government Presses received by the Commission, theCommission has decided to introduce ballot papers with counterfoils in allfuture elections to the Council of States/House of the People/State Legisla-tive Assemblies/State Legislative Councils.

2. One sample each of the ballot paper with counterfoil printed by theSuperintendent of the Government Press, Ahmedabad, Gujarat State, for usein election to. the House of the People is sent herewith. In one specimen,the counterfoil is separated from the body of the ballot paper by two thickblack lines with a perforated rule in between and in the other sample, bytwo thick black lines without a perforated rule. You may adopt one orthe other specimen according to the facilities available in your GovernmentPress for the printing of ballot papers.

3. The ballot paper to be used for elections to the House of the People,State Legislative Assembly and in Council constituencies, will have thecounterfoil at the top of the ballot paper so as to reduce the quantity ofpaper which will be required for the printing of ballot papers. The ballotpapers for elections by Assembly members should have the counterfoil on thelengthwise side as this will not increase to any appreciable extent the quan-tity of paper required for the printing of ballot papers. In the ballot papersto be used for election to the House of the People/State Legislative Assemb-lies/Council Constituencies, the counterfoil will be separated from the bodyof the ballot paper by two thick black lines, with or without perforation.The ballot papers to be used for elections by Assembly members shouldhave a perforation separating the counterfoil from the body of the ballotpaper.


4. In the case of the ballot papers to be used for elections to the Houseof the People/State Legislative Assemblies/Council Constituencies, the•ballot paper will be detached from the counterfoil with the help of a flatmetal rule, which should have a sharp edge on the lengthwise side. Thesize of the metal rule may be 10'xl".

5. The prescribed width of the ballot paper for elections to the Houseof the People/State Legislative Assemblies/Council Constituencies is 4".The Commission considers that the width could be conveniently reducedto 3-1/2" which will help to effect considerable savings in the quantity of

paper required for the printing of ballot papers. The necessary directionsin the matter will be issued in due course.

6. The ballot papers for elections to the House of the People/StateLegislative Assemblies and Council constituencies will be made into bun-dles, each bundle containing 50 ballot papers with consecutive serial num-bers. This will be done by means of wire stitching at the top centre ofthe ballot paper.

7. The serial number on the ballot paper should correspond with thaton the counterfoil. For facility of printing, the serial number on both thecounterfoil and the ballot paper may be on the front face of the ballot paperas in the specimen copies.

8. Necessary amendments to the relevant provisions of the Conductof Elections Rules, 1961, will be issued in due course. In the meantime,you are requested to inform the Superintendent/Manager of the State Gov-ernment Press regarding the new design of the ballot papers to be printedfor future elections so that the Presses will equip themselves for printingof ballot papers according to the revised design. It may be mentioned thathardly any additional time would be required for the printing of the ballotpapers with counterfoils of the type and design suggested.

9. The receipt of this letter may kindly be acknowledged.

Yours failthfully,

Sd.A. N. SEN,

Secretary"

Before the issue of this circular letter, the matter was thoroughly dis-cussed in a Conference of the Chief Electoral Officers in New Delhi on the27th March, 1971. The matter was discussed by the Chief Election Com-missioner in great detail with the Superintendents of the GovernmentPrinting Presses in Bombay, Ahemdabad and Haryana and the Controllerof Printing, Government of India Press, New Delhi. Thereafter on the

3 EC/72—10.


11th August, 1971, the following circular letter was issued to all the ChiefElectoral Officers:—

"No.52/71(Gen)ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Talkatora Road, New Delhi-1.

Dated the 11th August, 1971

ToThe Chief Electoral Officers of all States (except Nagaland) and

Union territories (except Andaman and Nicobar Islands).

Subject:—Ballot papers—Revised design with counterfoils.

Sir,

In continuation of the Commission's letter No. 52/71 (Gen), datedthe 18th June, 1971, I am directed to say that the Commission has receivedspecimen ballot papers with counterfoils from a few States. On examin-ing these specimen ballot papers and in the light of further discussions withsome of the Superintendents of Government Presses and the Chief Elec-toral Officers, it has been found necessary to make certain changes in thespecifications for the ballot papers suggested in the Commission's letter re-ferred to above. It has been pointed out that the use of two thick blacklines with perforated rule/disjointed line in between for separating thecounterfoil and the ballot paper, may lead to the cutting of the ballot paperat that portion in the Press thereby detaching the counterfoil from the ballotpaper. To avoid this it is proposed that there should be a shaded area indi-cated by a block of lines with a perforated rule/disjointed line in the mid-dle between the counterfoil and the ballot paper, instead of two thick blacklines.

It has also been pointed out that the width of the arrow cross markrubber stamp is not uniformly made according to specifications. In somecases they are slightly bigger than the prescribed width with the result thatwhen the mark is made in or near the shaded area between two columns,part of the mark appears in two columns thereby making it difficult for theReturning Officer to decide in whose favour the mark has been made. Itis, therefore, proposed to increase the width of the shaded area betweenthe columns of two candidates from 2£ ems to 3 ems. It will not bepossible to affix the mark entirely within the shaded area unless a votermakes a special effort to do so.

I am accordingly to send herewith two copies of the specifications asmodified for printing sample ballot papers with counterfoils and to requestthat a few ballot papers may be printed in your State Government Pressin accordance with these specifications and sent to the Commission.

I am to inform you that the amendments required in the Conduct ofElections Rules, 1961, for adoption of the ballot paper with counterfoil are


under consideration of the Commission and formal directions under theamended rules will be issued after the amendments to the rules are made.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/(K. GANESAN)

UNDER SECRETARY (LEGAL)"

"SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRINTING SAMPLE BALLOTPAPERS WITH COUNTERFOILS

1. The shaded area between the counterfoil and the ballot paper shouldbe indicated by a block of lines/dots with a perforated rule/disjoinedstraight line in the middle. The use of black border dividing the counter-foil from the ballot paper may lead to the paper being cut in the printingpress at that portion, thereby completely detaching the counterfoil fromthe ballot paper. This should be avoided at all costs. Therefore, insteadof a black border between the counterfoil and the ballot paper, as indicatedin the Commission's letter dated 18.6.71, there should be a shaded areaindicated by a block of lines/dots with a perforated rule)disjointed straightline in between.

2. The width of the ballot paper shall be 4' as at present.

3. Where serial numbering is done by means of hand-numbering mach-ine, the numbering may be done at the back of the ballot paper, specialcare being taken to see that the serial numbers on both the ballot paperand the counterfoil are the same.

4. Where there are only two contesting candidates in a constituency,the serial number of the ballot paper, the name of the constituency and thelegend of the election will be printed in the first and only shaded area ofthe ballot paper, in case the serial number on the counterfoil and the serialnumber on the ballot paper are printed on the front and not on the reverse.

5. The words 'Electoral Roll Part No.' and 'Serial No. of Elector' willbe printed on the counterfoil. Similarly, in addition to the words 'signa-ture' the words 'Thumb impression' shall be added on the counterfoil.

6. The specification of the ballot paper will be as follows:

(a) width 4'(b) Counterfoil—15 ems.(c) Width of shaded area 3 ems. (The width 2-1/2 ems. for the

shaded area between the two candidates is insufficient as in somecases the arrow mark of the rubber stamp will fall in the columnsof both the candidates on either side of the shaded area).

(d) The width of the space allotted to each candidate will be6e ms.

(e) Black border on the top and the bottom of ballot paper 1 em.


7. The ballot papers will be stitched into bundles, each bundle con-taining 50 ballot papers with consecutive serial numbers, after the serialnumbers on the ballot papers and the counterfoils are checked."

After considering the suggestions and the comments received from thevarious Chief Electoral Officers, the Commission finalised its instructionsand issued the following letter on the 18th November, 1971:

"ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIATalkatora Road.

New Delhi-1.

Dated the 18th November, 1971.No. 52|71(Gen.)

To

The Chief Electoral Officers of all States and Union Territories.

Subject : Ballot papers—Revised design with counterfoils.Sir,

In continuation of the Commission's letter No. 52/71 (Gen.), datedthe 21st October, 1971, I am directed to say that a question has beenraised that the new design of ballot papers with counterfoils will involvemuch wastage because a bundle will contain 50 ballot papers and in acase in which a polling station has to be supplied with say, 810 ballotpapers 850 ballot papers will have to be supplied resulting in wastage of 40ballot papers. In view of the present acute scarcity of paper, all avoid-able wastage should be prevented. This can be achieved by supplying afew bundles containing 10 ballot papers also to the Returning Officer ofeach assembly constituency. For example, if 54,500 ballot papers have tobe supplied to a Returning Officer, it can be made up of 1000 bundles of50 ballot papers each and 450 bundles of 10 ballot papers each. Thiscan be done very easily and there will be no wastage whatsoever.

From the sample ballot papers received from the various States/UnionTerritories it has been observed that some of the ballot papers containblack border(s) between the counterfoil and the ballot paper. These arerequired to be changed with a block or blocks of rules with a dotted linein between. Otherwise, there is the danger of the ballot paper being cutat the black border by mistake in the Press, thereby separating the ballotpaper.

It has also been observed that the depth of the counterfoil fixed by theCommission as 15 ems has not been maintained uniformly in all the sizesof ballot papers. The space allotted to each panel of a candidate and eachshaded area between the panels of candidates should be 6-1/2 ems and3 ems respectively. This should not be reduced to suit the size of thepapers but the necessary adjustment can be made in the depth of thecounterfoil. The counterfoil should contain the following particulars: —

1. Space for stitching at the top centre of the ballot paper.2. Black border of 1 em.3. No. and name of the constituency and legend of election.


4. "Electoral Roll Part No. " and "Serial No. of Elector "at left hand or right hand as necessary.

5. Serial No. of ballot paper at left hand.6. Space for signature or thumb impression of elector.7. The words "signature/thumb impression".8. One block of lines of 1 em (with a perforated rule/disjointed

straight line separating the ballot paper from counterfoil).

N.B. One block of lines of 1 em shall appear on the top of ballot paper.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/- K. S. RAJAGOPALAN,Secretary."

After that some suggestions as to the number of ballot papers withcounterfoils to be contained in each bundle of ballot papers were receivedfrom the Chief Electoral Officer of Andhra Pradesh. Accordingly, theCommission on the 20th January, 1972, issued the following Circular letterto the various Chief Electoral Officers:—

"No. 52/71 (Gen).Election Commission of India.

Talkatora Road,New Delhi-1.

Dated the 20th January, 1972.To

The Chief Electoral Officers of allStates and Union Territories.

Subject: Ballot papers—Revised design with counterfoils.Sir,

I am directed to enclose a copy of letter No. 2/Elec. K/72-3, datedthe 12th January, 1972 received from the Chief Electoral Officer, AndhraPradesh, Hyderabad. It is suggested therein that the ballot papers shouldbe stitched by the printing Presses only in bundles of 50 each and not inany other combination. The Returning Officers should allot the ballotpapers to each polling stations having regard to the number of voters(rounded off to the next ten) and for this purpose, he may, if necessary,take out the required number of ballot papers from the last stitched bundleof 50 intended for a polling station and restitch it. In that case, the supplyof ballot papers to the next polling station will start from the first serialNo. of the restitched bundle and not from a new separate bundle. Thismethod is suggested to avoid confusion at the time of preparing ballotpaper account and the necessity of entering the numbers of ballot papersin broken series therein. This will also avoid giving separate serial num-bers to bundles of ten if this is being done.


I am to say that the Commission has accepted the suggestion madein the letter and you may also adopt the same method of issuing theballot papers to the presiding officers, if you so desire.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-K. GANESAN.

Under Secretary (legal)"

"(Copy)

ELECTIONS/IMMEDIATE

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Hyderabad.Dated 12.1.1972

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (ELECTIONS. K) DEPARTMENT

Letter No. 2/Elec. K/72—3

From

Sri S. A. Abbas,Joint Secretary to Government.To Duplicate copy •

The Secretary, Sri K. S. Rajagopalan,Election Commission of India, Secretary,Talkatora Road, Election Commission of India,New Delhi. Talkatora Road, New Delhi.

Sir,

Sub:—Ballot papers—Revised design with counterfoils.

Ref:—Your letter No. 52/71 (Gen) dated 18-11-1971.

In para 1 of the letter cited, instructions have been issued that inorder to avoid wastage of papers, the ballot papers may be supplied toReturning Officers in bundles of 50 papers each and some bundles of 10papers each. The above arrangement may lead to some practical diffi-culties as noted below:

(1) It will definitely save time if at Government Presses where fheballot papers are printed, arrangements are made to stitch the papers asbundles of 50 papers each only and not in other combinations. It willlead to confusion if some papers are stitched into bundles of 50 and someof 10 papers each.

(2) If it is insisted that a few bundles should necessarily be madeinto 10 papers each, it cannot obviously be done at random, but as aworking arrangement, the last or first 2000 or 3000 papers of a parti-cular constituency, can alone be made into bundles of 10 papers each.


(3) By making 10 papers bundles, of the last or first few thousandpapers of the constituency, the series of ballot papers to be given at apolling station will be broken. Even now, in many cases, the PresidingOfficers get confused in preparing ballot paper account and though parti-cular care is being taken to give them intensive training to fill up form16, it is not unlikely, that if a number of broken series are given to thepolling station, the presiding officers are apt to commit mistakes in pre-paring the ballot paper account which will lead to complications at thetime of counting.

(4) If the last few thousands are stitched into bundles of 10 paperseach, the difficulty may also arise for issuing postal ballot papers by theReturning Officers to voters on election duty, as under the present ins-tructions, the ballot papers taken from the end of the series, will have tobe set apart for use as postal ballot papers and the few bundles of 10papers each may be utilized for this purpose only.

All things considered, it seems advisable that the ballot papers arebundled and supplied to Returning Officers only in bundles of 50 paperseach. They may in their turn, allot the ballot papers to each pollingstation having regard to the number of voters (rounded off to the nextten) and for this purpose, they may, if necessary, take out the requirednumber of papers from the concerned bundle and restitch it. The re-maining bundle (containing of less than 50 papers) will be the startingpoint for issue for the next polling station. This was exactly the practicefollowed previously when papers were not supplied in stitched bundles.The re-stitching of bundles can be arranged with bostitch machines orwith thread. This method has the advantage of arranging to issue theballot papers in one series to polling stations, and will enable the Presid-ing officers to prepare the ballot paper account more correctly.

It is presumed that there is no objection to follow the above proce-dure, for after all, whether the bundle is stitched at the level of the Gov-ernment Press or at the level of Returning Officer, it makes no differenceand what is more important is the SI. No. on the ballot paper and coun-terfoil and its continuity.

Instructions are solicited whether arrangements can be proceeded withas suggested above.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-P. V. GOPAL RAO,

for Joint Secretary to Government."

Then on the 2nd February, 1972, the following two letters wereissued:—


"ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIATalkatora Road,New Delhi-1.

No. 52/71 (Gen.) Dated the 2nd February, 1972.

ToThe Chief Electoral Officers of all States and Union Territories.

Subject: Ballot Papers—Revised design with counterfoils—Supplyof ballot papers with counterfoils to Presiding Officers.

Sir,I am directed to refer to para 4 of the Commission's letter No. 52/71

(Gen.), dated the 11th January, 1972, and to say that the bundles ofballot papers with counterfoils which are delivered to the Presiding Officersshould not contain any ballot paper which is defective in any respectwhatsoever. The defective ballot paper, if any, in the stitched bundle ofballot papers should be first removed from the bundle by the ReturningOfficer or by some other responsible officer nominated by the ReturningOfficer and then that bundle has to be restitched immediately by bostichmachine or with thread. Other instructions in this behalf are alreadycontained in paragraph 23 of Chapter II of the Hand Book for Return-ing Officers—1972. If, in spite of the above procedure, any ballot paperis found defective at the polling stations, it will be cancelled by the Pre-siding Officer.

The above instructions may be brought to the notice of all the DistrictElection Officers/Returning Officers in your State/Union Territory forcompliance.

[This disposes of your letter No. 3331/71-24, dated20th January, 1972. The Commission is not in p rrzxn-\favour of your suggestion to send ballot papers M , ,banded in lots of 50 to the polling stations for XNaau o m y

being shuffled and stitched with thread.]Yours faithfully,

Sd/-K. GANESAN

Under Secretary {Legal)""ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Talkatora Road,New Delhi-1.

No. 52/72 (Gen.)/ Dated the 2nd February, 1972.To


Subejct: Elections—Ballot papers—Time of issue to PresidingOfficers.

Sir,I am directed to state that in connection with a recent bye-election,

a complaint was made to the Commission that the ballot papers had been


delivered by the Returning Officer to the presiding officers of the pollingstations 5 days before the poll. In view of the maximum security pre-cautions which are taken for the printing and distribution of the ballotpapers to the returning officers, it would be quite unsafe to distribute theballot papers to the presiding officers several days before the poll. Forthis reason, the Commission has issued a direction in paragraph 23 (v) ofChapter II of the Handbook for Returning Officers, 1972 Edition, thatthe Returning Officer should noi distribute the ballot papers to the pollingparties except on the day they proceed to the polling stations assigned tothem for taking the poll and once they are handed over to the pollingparties, they should be kept under proper security arrangements. Inpolling stations which can be reached by the polling parties in one day,the ballot papers should be issued only on the day before the poll. Incases in which it will take more than one day for the polling parties toreach the polling stations, the ballot papers should not be issued a dayearlier than absolutely necessary. In either case, from the moment theballot papers are delivered to the presiding officers, they should be providedwith security guards and they should proceed straight from the place ofdistribution to the polling stations.

In cases in which it requires more than one day for the polling partyto reach the polling station, it would be desirable not to deliver the ballotpapers to the presiding officers along with the other materials required forthe poll, but to arrange to distribute the ballot papers required for eachpolling station through the sector officers who are required to visit eachpolling station within their charge atleast once on the day before thepoll. In that case, the ballot papers will be checked by the presidingofficers at the polling stations and their receipts will be obtained by thesector officers concerned.

The receipt of this letter may kindly be acknowledged.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-K. GANESAN

Under Secretary {Legal)"

In addition to the directions and instructions contained in the abovecircular letters issued by the Election Commission, attention is drawn toparagraphs 22 and 23 of the Returning Officers' Handbook in Chapter II(1972-Edition). These paragraphs are as follows:—

"22. (a) The following instructions are issued regarding the extentto which surplus ballot papers may be printed for anelection and of such surplus ballot papers:—

(1) The surplus ballot papers printed for each constituencymust be reduced to the minimum possible. When severalassembly constituencies each requiring varied number ofballot papers are assembled in one forme in the Govern-ment Press for printing the ballot papers of the severalconstituencies simultaneously the highest number of ballotpapers required for any of the constituencies in that forme


will be printed and consequently printing of some surplusballot papers for the other constituencies in the frame isunavoidable. However, this surplus could be reduced ifcare is taken to select the constituencies requiring moreor less the same number of ballot papers for assembly inone forme.

(2) In the case of Parliamentary Constituencies where thenumber of ballot papers required for a constituency willusually run into several lakhs, a single forme should beused for the printing of ballot papers for each Parliamen-tary Constituency as far as practicable.

(3) Proper registers should be maintained of the total numberof ballot papers for each constituency that are printed.

Printing of Ballot Paper.

(b) The interval between the last date for withdrawal of candi-datures and the first date of poll is very short and the ballotpapers will have to be printed and distributed to the variousreturning officers by the Chief Electoral Officer within thisshort period. It will be seen that hardly a week or 10 daysat the most will be available for the printing of ballot papers.It is, therefore, very important that you should furnish to theChief Electoral Officer (immediately after 3.00 p.m.) on thelast date for withdrawal of candidatures the names of con-testing candidates as arranged in Form 7-A together with thesymbols allotted to each of them either by telegram or by send-ing a special messenger. You should also make special arrange-ments to collect the ballot papers of the constituencies ofwhich you are the Returning Officer immediately they areprinted.

The arrangements for the transport of the ballot papers from thepress or the district headquarters to your head-quarters may bemade as far as possible in closed vans and lorries under propersecurity guard. You should keep all ballot papers under lock andseal in the treasury.

Verification of Ballot Papers.

23. The ballot papers for elections to the House of the People/StateLegislative Assembly will be supplied to you in bundles con-taining 50 ballot papers and 10 ballot papers. Each bundlewill have consecutive serial numbers. On receipt of the ballotpapers you should check all of them to ensure that—

(i) the names of all the contesting candidates and symbol allottedto each of them have been printed properly and correctly;

(ii) the serial number on the ballot paper corresponds with that onthe counterfoil. Where serial numbering is done by means ofhand numbering machine, the serial numbers will appear atback of the ballot paper and counterfoil;


(iii) there is no discrepancy in the number of ballot papers as sentby the Press and the number found on actual counting at yourend;

(iv) you should give clear instruction that ballot papers with dupli-cate numbers and the number of ballot papers with missingnumbers are clearly noted in a register and published on thenotice board at the Distributing Centre. A copy of the noticeshould be sent to each of the Contesting Candidates;

(v) you should not distribute the ballot papers to the polling partiesexcept on the day they proceed to the polling station assignedto them for taking the poll. Once they are handed over tothe polling parties they should be kept under proper securityarrangements."

Before proceeding further it may be pointed out that election in 43-Lehassembly constituency in Jammu and Kashmir and in three assembly cons-tituencies in Himachal Pradesh, namely, 1-Kinnaur, 55-Bharmour and 56-Lahaul-Spiti, had to be postponed to future dates because of climaticconditions. The poll in Leh assembly constituency was taken on the 6thJune, 1972 and the result of the election was declared on the 12th June,1972. The poll in the three Himachal Pradesh assembly constituenciesmentioned above, was taken on the 4th June, 1972 and the results of theelections were declared on the 8th June, 1972 in Kinnaur and Bharmourassembly constituencies and on the 9th June, 1972 in Lahaul-Spiti assemblyconstituency.

During the 1972 Fifth General Election to the Legislative Assembliesthe poll was counter-manded under section 52 of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1951, only in one assembly constituency, namely, 69-Dehgamassembly constituency in the State of Gujarat, on account of the death ofShri Chaturbhai Mangaldas Amin, one of the contesting candidates. Thefresh poll in that constituency was taken on the 16th April, 1972.

In as many as 33 assembly constituencies there was no contest andthe elections were unopposed with the result that the candidates in these33 assembly constituencies were declared elected unopposed under section53 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Statewise breakup of these 33 uncontested returns was as follows:

Name of State

1. Andhra Pradesh2. Assam3. Jammu & Kashmir4. Maharashtra

Unopposed Returns

Total

17253

ScheduledCastes

ScheduledTribes

1

1 4 4 G E N E R A L E L E C T I O N S T O T H E L E G I S L A T I V E A S S E M B L I E S

N a m e o f S t a t e

5 . M a n i p u r . . . . .

6 . M e g h a l a y a . . . .

7 . P u n j a b . . . . .

8 . R a j a s t n a n

T o t a l . . . . .

T o t a l

1. . 3

11

33

S c h e d u l e dC a s t e s

11

4

ScheduledTribes

3

4

The names of the 33 assembly constituencies in which these uncontestedelections took place are given below:

ASSEMBLY GENERAL ELECTIONS, 1972UNCONTESTED RETURNS

5/. No. Name of State/SI. No. and name ofconstituencies.

1. ANDHRA PRADESH

1. 20-Gajapathinagaram.2. 50-Anaparthi3. 68-Ungutur4. 69-Dendulur5. 91-Avanigadda6. 150-Mydukur7. 178-Kodumur (SC)8. 182-Koilkuntla9. 184-Panyam

10. 185-Nandikotkur11. 197-Amarchinta12. 198-Makthal13. 200-Tandur14. 235-Mudhole15. 236-Nirmal16. 242-Chinnur (SC)17. 259-Dornakal

2. ASSAM

18. 15-Udharbond19. 18-HaflongCST)


3. JAMMU & KASHMIR

20. 23-Beerwa21. 41-Verinag22. 42-Naubug23. 44-Kargil24. 50-Banehal

4. MAHARASHTRA

25. 16-Mangaon26. 183-Georai27. 211-Malshiras

5. MANIPUR

28. 55-Jiriban

6. MEGHALAYA

29. 41-Siju (ST)30. 59-Dalamgiri (ST)31. 60-Salwanpara (ST).

7. PUNJAB

32. 54-Kartarpur (SC)

8. RAJASTHAN

33. 150-Desuri (SC)

The party position (as on 18-2-72) of the results declared (Uncontested Return)

I n d i a n N a t i o n a l C o n g r e s s ( I N C ) . . . . . . . . . 3 0A l l P a r t y H i l l L e a d e r s ' C o n f e r e n c e ( A P H L C ) 3

T o t a l 3 3

The following statement gives within a very short compass statisticalinformation about certain important election matters and may be of greatinterest to all concerned:—

The Fifth General Elections to the Legislative Assemblies

ABSTRACT

1. States and Union Territories going to poll in...18 (16 States and 2 UnionMarch, 1972. territories (Delhi and Goa

Daman & Diu).


2. Total No. of Seats3. Total No. of Electors .4. Total No. of constituencies .

. 2,727. 19,52,72,629. 2,727

5. Total No. of contested constituencies . . . 2,694 (33 uncontested)6. Total No. of contesting candidates . . . 12,030 (including uncontested

7. Total No. of polling stations8. Total No. of polling personne

returns and countermandedpoll in DehgamGujarat).

. 2,69,0681 . . . 1 4 lakhs approx.

1972—Partywise break-up of the contesting candidates

National Parties :

1. Indian National Congress .2. Indian National Congress(O)3. Swatantra Party4. Bhartiya Jana Sangh .5. Communist Party of India .

Contesting i

. . . . . .

6. Communist Party of India (Marxist)7. Socialist Party .

State Parties:1. Haryana . . . .

2. Jammu & Kashmir

3. Maharashtra

4. Manipur . . ,5. Meghalaya6. Mysore . . . .7. Punjab . . . .

8. Tripura . . . .9. West Bengal

10. Goa, Daman & D u .

11. Independents and others

Total

. . . . .

Vishal HaryanaAkhil Bharatiya Arya SabhaJ & K National ConferenceJMIPeasants' & Workers' PartyRepublican Party of IndiaManipur People's PartyAll Party Hill Leaders' ConferenceJanta PakshaShiromani Akali DalShiromani Akali Dal (Gurnam Singh)Tripura Congress TUSForward BlocRevolutionary Socialist PartyMaharashtravadi GomantakUn ted Goans (Sequeria Group)

a.c. in

Candidate

2529872306

1233329468669

155

Nil35

11942492

7337

18172326

5173

12030

The repoll or fresh poll under section 57, or as the case may be,section 58 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, was ordered in32 polling stations throughout the country either on the ground that some


ballot papers or ballot boxes were removed by unauthorised persons oron the ground of illegality or irregularity in taking the poll. As usual thelargest number of such cases occurred in Bihar and Jammu & Kashmir.In some other States also similar instances occurred but their number wasvery much less. The following two statements show the names of theStates and the polling stations where such repoll or fresh poll was ordered.

STATEMENT 1

Statement showing the names of the places where the poll wasordered to be held again due to the reason that some ballotpapers/ballot boxes were removed by unauthorised persons.

BIHAR

1. 120-L. P. School, Parej; 30-Darauli assembly constituency.2. 134-Middle School Aura (N.W.), 69-Belsand assembly constituency.3. 135-Middle School Aura (S.W.) — do—4. 21-L. P. School, Sudampur, 170-Jhajha assembly constituency.5. 53-Bhusi Chak, 179-Kharagpur assembly constituency.6. 72-U.P. School Rostampur, 237-Ghosi assembly constituency.7. 107-L. P. School Rupanchak, 26-Mirganj assembly constituency.8. 108-L. P. School Mathia, 26-Mirganj assembly constituency.

JAMMU & KASHMIR

9. 41-Bagroota, 49-Ramban assembly constituency.10. 6-Shalgam, 14-Akura (38-Dij Bihara assembly constituency).11. 5-Audoorah, 7-Haril, 8-Manabal, 10-Teernatantrey (6-Haril assembly

constituency).12. 1-Aadipora (9-Sopore assembly constituency).13. 8-Payerpora (Haihama), 11-Batpora-A, (2-Kupwara assembly consti-

tuency) .14. 7-Thandusa (3-Lolab assembly constituency).15. 50-Batapore (22-Hazratbal assembly constituency).16. 1-Zantrag (30-Pampore assembly constituency).17. 25-Latter Masjid (20-Safakadal assembly constituency).

STATEMENT IIStatement showing the names of the places where the poll was

ordered to be held again due to the reasons other than ballotboxes and ballot papers having been removed by unauthorisedpersons.

Name and No. of polling station Reason for repoll

BIHAR1. 146-L. P. School Mathia 26-Mirganj Assem- Due to clash between rival parties

bly constituency. and rioting.


2. 148-U. P. School, Jajuar Lakshmipur(S.W.), 64-Aurai assembly constituency.

3. 3^-Girls Sihool Birkaidaj Toli (W.W.)—239-Chiibassa asssmbly constituency.

4. 40-GirIs School Barkandaj Toli (W.W.)—289-Chaibassa assembly constituency.

Due to clash between rival partiesand rioting.

The polling stations were set up ina building which was not approvedby the Commission,

—do—

JAMMU & KASHMIR

1. 10-Nuraker—25-Badgam assembly consti-tuency.

2. 34-Khandipora—29-Pulwama assemblyconstituency.

3. 15-Zadiabal-B, 2l-Zaidibal assembly cons-tituency.

Due to assault on polling party andsome polling material unlawfullytaken away from the polling station.

— d o -

On account of acute disturbances at

polling station.ASSAM

1. 7-Digunpara, 68-Kamalpur assembly cons-tituency.

2. 29-Ladanguri—40-Sidliconstituency.

The polling at the polling station wassuspended by the Presiding Officerfor five minutes before the closinghour due to insufficient light andthereby some of the voters couldnot exercise their franchise.

(ST) assembly The ballot papers were found shortby the Presiding Officer during thecourse of polling and the ballotpapers could not be sent to himin time due to distance.

ANDHRA PRADESH

1. The polling was adjourned at polling station Due to large scale violence resultingNos. 88 to 95 set up at Chinganjam village in police firing and consequentof 111-Parchur assembly constituency. adjournment of poll.

MYSORE

Due to insertion of the ballot paperswith signed counterfoils in theballot box.

1. 74-Anupahally—93-Devenahalli assemblyconstituency.

2. ni-D/igondsnaballi-1,117-Hunsurassembly —do—constituency.

3. 9-Kaloor—121-Mercara assembly constitu- —do—ency.

MANIPUR

1. P.S. No. 1 of 60-Churachandur, assembly Some ballot papers were wronglyconstituency. issued by the Presiding Officer.


RAJASTHAN

1. 94-Bichagaon—59-Rajgarh assembly consti- Cross mark sea! was used as distin-tuency. guishing mark sea! and distinguish-

ing mark sea! was given to votersfor marking the ballot papers.

The repoll or fresh poll in each of these 32 polling stations was howeverfinished between the 10th March, 1972 and the 15th March, 1972 with theresult that the elections in all constituencies in which these polling stationswere included could be finished before the due constitution of the respectiveLegislative Assemblies.

In addition to these cases of repoll and fresh poll, reports were receivedfrom the returning officers about interference with poll in some other States.Thus for example, from West Bengal reports were received about interferencewith the polling in 10 polling stations but no fresh poll was considered nece-ssary. The returning officers were directed that at the time of counting, theballot boxes containing ballot papers used in each of these 10 polling stationsshould not be opened at all but should be kept apart and if at the conclusionof the counting it was found that the difference in the number of valid votespolled by the leading candidate and the number of valid votespolled by the next candidate was more than the total number of electorsassigned to such polling station, then no repoll or fresh poll would be nece-ssary and the returning officers could declare the leading candidate as elected.If. however, such difference was less than the total number of electors assignedto such polling station then the returning officer should not declare the resultof the election but should refer the matter to the Election Commission forfurther directions. As a result of these directions no repoll or fresh pollwas ordered in any of these polling stations because the difference betweenthe number of valid votes obtained by the leading candidate andthe number of valid votes polled by the next candidate was, in eachof these cases, more than the total number of electors assigned to the pollingstation concerned. These 10 cases were in the following constituencies:

S!. No. Nine of the assembly No. and name of the polling stationconstituency affected

1. 41-Milda 54-Satmara Junior School2. 101-Jadavpur . . . . . 91-Dinabandhu Andrews College Baishnabh-

gat (Room No. 1)92- —do— (Room No. 2)

3. 122-Titagarh 32-Mannutha Nath High School, Chandanpukur Darset Road, (Room No. 1)

33- —do— (Room No. 2)93-Harijan Pathshala, Raghunath Prasad

Gupta Path, (Room No. 1)94- —do— (Room No. 2)

3 EC/72-1 1.


SI. No. Name of the assemblyconstituency

4. 139-ToIlygunj

5. 126-Baranagar .

No. and name of the pollingstation affected

. 24-Milangarh Balika Vidyalaya (Room No3)

. 61-Milani, 193-Pramank Ghat Road79-Jyatinagar Bidyasri Niketan, Calcuua

No. 35, (Room No. 2)

Total 10

In other States also there were similar cases as will appear from thestatement below:

Name of State

Assam

Haryana .

Jammii & Kashmir

Madhya Pradesh

MysoreMeghalaya

SI. No. and name of polling Si. No. and name ofstation assembly constituency

1. 6-Tukrajhar P.I.2. 32-Baruagaon3. 55-Jajwan4. 51-HansiCity5. 9-Shathagund Bala6. 4-Kutlari-B7. 14-RatagundS. 22-RawaIporah9. 34-Ujroo

10. 37-Harwan11. 44-Wadoorah12. 48-Chichsy Bandey13. 29-Guloora-A14. 32-Shatkot-A15. 25-Hajil-A16. 24-Drugmulia-B17. 65-Ward No. 22 of

Indore-IV18. 61-Bichkal

19. Matchimpara

40-Sidli115-Dhemaj i28-Jind

70-Hansi6-Harl

—do——do—

4-Bandipora5-Handwara7-Refiabad11-Sonawari2-Kupwara

254-Indore-IV26-Kushtagi59-Dalamgiri (ST)

Thus together with the 10 cases in West Bengal in all there were 29cases throughout the country in which reports of irregularity and illegalityetc. in the taking of the poll were obtained from the returning officers butno repoll or fresh poll was directed for the reasons stated above.

The following printed Code of Conduct was issued by the Commission


for the guidance of the political parties and candidates:—


MODEL CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE GUIDANCE OFPOLITICAL PARTIES AND CANDIDATES

(1) No party or candidate should indulge in any activity whichwould aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatredor cause tension between different castes and communities,religious or linguistic.

(2) While criticising other political parties, the criticism should beconfined to their policies and programme, past record and work.So also, it is necessary to eschew criticism of all aspects ofprivate life not connected with the public activities of the leadersor the workers of other parties. Further, no criticism of theparties or their workers based on unverified allegations or dis-tortion should be indulged in.

(3) Political parties and candidates will ensure that their supportersdo not create obstructions in or break up meetings, processions,etc., organised by other parties. Workers or sympathisers of onepolitical party will not try to create disturbances at public meet-ings organised by another political party by putting questionsorally or in writing or by distributing leaflets of their own party.Processions should not be taken by one party along places wheremeetings are held by another party. Posters issued by oneparty shall not be removed by workers of another party.

(4) Complaints against individual policeman should first be broughtto the notice of the Superintendent of Police concerned andthen the Inspector General of Police and they will be takenup before the public, only if not satisfied with the action takenby the Superintendent of Police or the Inspector General ofPolice.

(5) The Government officers, while taking measures to maintainlaw and order, will take care not to impose undue restrictionson civil liberties and will not employ such measures as wouldinterfere with a satisfactory election campaign by the parties.

(6) The ruling party will ensure that no cause is given for anycomplaint that it has used its official position for the purpose ofits election campaign.

(7) There should be no appeal to caste or communal feelings forsecuring votes. Mosques, Churches, Temples or any otherplace of worship should not be used as a forum for electionpropaganda.


(8) All parties and candidates should co-operate with the officerson election duty to ensure a peaceful and orderly polling andcomplete freedom for the voters to exercise their franchisewithout being subjected to any annoyance or obstruction.Police may take appropriate action promptly against any onetrying to_ tease the voters going to a polling station, without atthe same time hindering the lawful business of party workersnear polling stations, who will be supplied by the political par-ties with suitable badges or identity cards.

(9) All parties and candidates should avoid scrupulously all acti-vities which are corrupt practices and offences under the elec-tion law, such as the bribing of voters, intimidation of voterspersonation of voters, canvassing within 100 metres of a pollingstation, holding public meetings during the period of 48 hoursending with the hour fixed for the close of the poll, transportand conveyance of voters to and from polling stations.

(10) All political parties and candidates should agree that the iden-tity slips supplied by them to voters will be on plain (white)paper and will not contain any symbol, name of the candidateor the name of the party.

(11) Liquor should not be sold, given or distributed on polling dayand during twelve hours preceding that day.

(12) There shall be a Standing Committee to whom complaint of anybreach of the Code can be made.

New Delhi, S.P.Sen-Varma30th December, 1971. Chief Election Commissioner

of India."

But I may say without any fear of contradiction that such Code of Con-duct is of little, practical value, because no party or no candidate observesthe various rules and instructions laid down in such Code of Conduct atthe crucial time, namely, election time. At that time every political partyand every candidate is, so as to say, overpowered and overwhelmed withan extreme sense of selfishness and hardly hesitates to have recourse tomeans, fair or foul, to win the elections. Therefore the issue by the Elec-tion Commission of any Code of Conduct before an election is, more orless, a meaningless ritual in which high sounding jargons are formulatedand published on every occasion.

We have already seen that the last date of the poll was the 1 lth March,1972. Therefore, the earliest date on which counting of votes could begin inany State or Union territory could not be any date earlier than the 11thMarch, 1972 but as at the time of the Fifth General Election to the LokSabha, 1971, so this tune also the Commission was anxious that the trend andthe result of counting of votes in any of the elections throughout the countryshould not be announced before 5.30 p.m. on the 11th March, 1972, so that


the poll on the 11th March, in the various States and Union territories mightnot be affected or influenced anywhere. With this object in view the Com-mission sent letters of request to the All-India Radio, to the Press Informa-tion Bureau, to the various News Agencies, such as the PTI, the UNI, andHindustan Samachar, requesting each of these authorities and agencies thatthey should kindly co-operate with the Election Commission in this respectby not publishing the trend or the result of the counting at any time before5.30 p.m. on the 11th March, 1972 and all these authorities and agenciesco-operated with the Commission by complying with this request. I againtake this opportunity to express the heart-felt thanks of the Commission toall these agencies, namely, the All India Radio, the PIB, the PTI, the UNIand the Hindustan Samachar and, the Newspapers in the country.

The counting passed off peacefully in all the 18 States and Union terri-tories and the last results were declared on the 16th March, 1972. The dueconstitution notifications under section 73 of the Representation of thePeople Act, 1951, were issued on the dates mentioned in the Table belowand upon the issue of these notifications the respective Legislative Assemb-lies were duly constituted in terms of that section. The dates for the firstmeeting of the various Legislative Assemblies are also shown in the saidTable:—

Name of the State/Union territory

1. Andhia Pradesh2. Assam3. Bihar4. Gujarat .5. Haryana .6. Himachal Pradesh . . .7. Jamrnu & Kashmir8. Madhya Pradesh9. Maharashtra . . . .

10. Manipur11. Meghalaya . . . .12. Mysore13. Punjab14. Rajasthan .15. Tripura16. West Bengal .17. Goa, Daman & Diu .18. Mizoram . . . . . .19. Ddhi (Metropolitan Council)

Date of due consti-tution under section

, 73 ofthe&.P. Act, 1951

14-3-197215-3-197219-3-197217-3-197214-3-197218-3-197217-5-197257-3-197213-3-197220-3-197216-3-197220-3-197217-3-197215-3-197220-3-197220-3-197214-3-197229-4-197216-3-1972

Date of First meetingof LegislativeAssembly

20-3-197222-3-197220-3-197220-3-19723-4-1972

27-3-197220-3-197224-3-197220-3-197230-3-197225-3-197224-3-197221-3-197220-3-197229-3-197224-3-197224-3-197210-5-197220-3-1972

As pointed out earlier the general election for constituting the FirstLegislative Assembly of a new Union Territory of Mizoram was also held


about a month after the general elections in the 18 States and Union terri-tories with which we have dealt so long. The total elective strength of theMizoram Legislative Assembly is 30 and the assembly constituencies aresingle member constituencies. The writ notification calling these 30 as-sembly constituencies was issued under section 15 of the Representationof the People Act, 1951, on the 17th March, 1972 and the programme forthe elections was as follows:

(i) L a s t d a t e for m a k i n g n o m i n a t i o n s . . . 24th M a r c h , 1972 (Fr iday)(ii) D a t e of scrut iny of n o m i n a t i o n s . . . . 25th M a r c h , 1972 (Saturday)

(iii) Las t d a t e for wi thdrawal of cand ida tu r e s . . 27th M a r c h , 1972 (Monday)(iv) Poll , . 18th Apri l , 1972 (Tuesday)(v) D a t e of comple t ion of e lec t ions . . . . 28th Apri l , 1972 (Fr iday)

All the results were declared by 28th April, 1972 and the due consti-tution notification under section 73 of the Representation of the People Act,1951, was issued on 29th April, 1972 and thereupon the First MizoramLegislative Assembly came into being thereby ushering the functioning ofrepresentative democracy in this new Union territory to the satisfaction andrejoicing of all. The new Legislative Assembly was summoned to meet forthe first time on the 10th May, 1972. With the completion of the generalelection to constitute the Legislative Assembly of new Union territory ofMizoram, the Fifth General Elections to the Legislative Assembly came to aclose.

In parenthesis it should be pointed out here that though the general elec-tion to the various Legislative Assemblies have been termed in this Report asthe Fifth General Elections, in some of the States such as West Bengal, Bihar,Punjab and Haryana, the General Election of 1972 was not the Fifth GeneralElection. In West Bengal the Fifth General Election to the Legislative Assem-bly was held in 1969, the Sixth General Election to that Legislative Assem-bly was held in 1971 alongwith the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabhaand the general election which was held to constitute the new Legislative As-sembly in West Bengal in 1972, was the Seventh General Election. In Bihar,it was Sixth General Election because the Fifth General Election was heldin 1969. In Haryana also it was the sixth General Election because theFifth General Election was held in 1968. The general election in Haryanain March, 1972 may also be called the Third General Election, because theFirst General Election for constituting the Legislative Assembly of theState of Haryana which became a separate State under the Punjab Reorga-nisation Act of 1966, was held in 1967. The general election which washeld in 1968 was therefore the Second Genera) Election and the generalelection in March last might be regarded as the Third General Election forthe State of Haryana. But perhaps, this will not be a correct descriptionbecause on the reorganisation of Punjab such of the members of the PunjabLegislative Assembly before its reorganisation as were allocated to theState of Haryana constituted the Legislative Assembly of Haryana (vide inthis connection section 13, section 14 and section 15 of the Punjab Reorga-nisation Act, 1966) (31 of 1966) and in that view of the matter, the Legis-lative Assembly of Haryana having been a continuation of the LegislativeAssembly of old Punjab, the general election which took place in 1967 for


constituting the Legislative Assembly of Haryana was the Fourth GeneralElection and therefore the general election of 1968 was the Fifth GeneralElection and the last general election of March, 1972 was the Sixth GeneralElection. In Punjab also it was the Sixth General Election because the FifthGeneral Election was held in 1969.

Before I conclude this Chapter, I propose to place below statementsshowing the number of members of the various Legislative Assemblieselected with more than 50 per cent of the valid votes polled and the num-ber of members of the various Legislative Assemblies elected with lesserpercentages :

Statement Showing the Party Position According to percentage of Votes Polled by Elected Candidates —'

in the General Elections to the State Legislative Assemblies in 1972.

(16 States & 3 U. Ts.)

Percentage of Votes polled PARTY POSITION §, . , Z

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHER TOTAL §IND £

tsA b o v e 5 0 % . . . . 1393 38 4 2 4 30 6 4 21 2 0 4 1 7 9 6 5

4 0 % - 5 0 % . . . . 3 8 6 32 4 0 9 14 31 10 120 6 3 9 g

3 0 % - 4 0 % 144 13 16 2 11 12 3 7 0 2 7 4 §

2 0 % - 3 0 % . . . . 12 5 6 ,. 2 5 .. 17 4 7 g

1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . . 1 .. . . .. . . . . . . . . 1 H

0%-10% . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. »f

T O T A L . . . . 1936 88 104 15 57 112 34 411 2757 §

<to

w

aw»-(w

GENERAL ELECTIONS

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates QZ

State—ANDHRA PRADESH Total Seats : 287 3

% INC NCO JBJS SWA SP CPI CPM Others IND Total M— rSeat Party gWon H

o1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 w

^ H

A b o v e 5 0 % . 174 . . . . . . . . '3' 1 l ' S T P 32 211 H

4 0 % — 5 0 % 37 . . . . 2 . . 1' .".' . . .. 16 58 w

3 U % — 4 0 % 8 . . . . . . . ' . " . . 1 S T P 8 17 «

o20%—30% 1 . . " .. . . . . 1 K

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . • . . . . . . . . H

0%—10% .. W. >

TOTAL 219 . . 2 . . 7 1 2 STP 56 287 H

ai r

**SampoornaTelenganaPrajaSamithi. S

GENERAL ELECTIONS t -

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972 °°


State—ASSAM - Total Seats : 114. _____ o

, _ . , , wINC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM Others IND Total g

% £Seat Party >;Won

__ w1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 o

H

' OAbove 50% 63 .. . . . . 2 2 . . . . . . 4 71 ' „

40%—50% 23 . . . . 1 1 1 PTC 4 30 g

30%-40% 9 .. . . . . 2 . . . . . . 2 13 H

20%—30% W

10%-20% w

0%—10% K_ . _ .. _-__.„-_-_ ... „ „_ „_„ . — E>

TOTAL . -95 1 4 3 . . 1 PTC 10 114 3

__ >•Including 2 uncontested. £_]**Plains Tribals Council of Assam. §

Cof1

MCO

GENERAL ELECTIONS


Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected candidates QState—BIHAR §

Total Seats : 318 wpa

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM Others IND TOTAL rSeat Party f

Won £j1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 o

2Above 50% 68 10 7 . . 20 11 .. 1 JKP 6 124 w

1 PHJ O40%—50% 55 12 7 1 7 13 1 JKP 5 104 H

1 HJS X1 HSD w

1 JKD r30%—40% 39 7 9 . . 5 8 . . 1 HSD 6 77 O

2 JKP £52 0 % — 3 0 % 5 1 2 . . 1 3 . . . . . . 1 13 £10%—20% 20%—10% »

, , j,.

TOTAL . 167 30 25 1 33 35 9 ** 18 318 wW

: ___._.„ „ „ , , „ ^i

**A11 India Jharkhand Party **JKP-4 »Bihar Prant HulJharkhand PHJ-1 EProgressive Hul Jharkhand Party HJS-1 S(Shibu group)Hindustani Shoshit Dal HSD-2Jharkhand Party JKD-1

9 •"*vo

GENERAL ELECTIONS ^CTN

OTO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972


State—GUJARAT Ow

Total Seats : 168 M± ; »

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM Others IND TOTAL ^o/ M/ 0 w

Seat Party O

Won g. •_• | Z

1 , , . , . . > 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 HO

Above 50% 99 5 .. . . ... .. . . . . . . 5 109 a

40%—50% ., .. ,, . .. 29 7 1 .. .. .. . . . . . . 2 39 r

30%—40% 12 2 1 .. . . 1 16 Q

20%—30% . . . . . . .. 2 1 1 A t

10%—20% §

0%-10% m

>

TOTAL . 140 16 3 . . . . 1 . . . . . . 8 168 S

r1

M

GENERAL ELECTIONS


Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates O

State—HARYANA Total Seats : 81 wjo>

_ _ _ _ ^INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM Others IND TOTAL w

r<tn

Seat Party £jWon 5

__ . "z,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 H

. , O

Above 50% 31 4 . . . . . . . . . . 2 VHP 2 39 g

4 0 % - 5 0 % 15 5 1 1 BAS 6 29 ^

1 VHP g

30%—40% 6 3 3 12 j£

20%—30% . . 1 ,.. . . 1 g

10%—20% w

0°/ 1 n °/ en

W

TOTAL . 52 12 2 4 ** 11 81 a

• : ' "*" •"• I . . , • • — - • • - P 5

**Vishal Haryana Party **VHP-3Bharatiya Arya Sabha BAS-1

ON

GENERAL ELECTIONSi—*

o\TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—I972. *°

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected candidates

State—HIMACHAL PRADESH TOTAL SEATS : 68 -

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL §' >o

Seat Party rWon M

, , ____._- __ , __ _____ t"1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8, „ .,., H-3

Above 50% 38 — 1 — — — 1 1 LRP 3 44 §

40%-50% • 10 - 3 — — — — - — 4 17 ^

30%-40% 3 — 1 _ _ _ _ _ i L R P _ 5 ©

20%-30% 2 — — — — — — — — — 2g

10%-20% r<

0%-10% Q

TOTAL : 5 3 — 5 _ _ _ _ 1 2 **LRP 7 68 %

** Lok Raj Party Himachal Pradesh. w

- • e n

tagaSCO

GENERAL ELECTIONS

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972.

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates M

State—JAMMU & KASHMIR TOTAL SEATS : 75 »_ _ ______ , _____ ________________________„____ _ _ — . . ________________ fH

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL Wteo

Seat Party $Won §

en1 23 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 g

Above 50% 49 — 3 — — — — 2 JMI 2 56 a

40%-50% 6 — — — — — 3 JMI 3 12 "

30%-40% 3 _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ 4 7 |

20%-30% r

10%-20% S

0%-10% w

TOTAL : 5 8 — 3 — — — _ 5 **JM1 9 74 w. . ^^__ ^

** Jamat-e-Islami, Jammu and Kashmir. *a

i—»

GENERAL ELECTIONS -+*•



State—MADHYA PRADESH TOTAL SEATS : 296 ow

i i ^% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL "

Seat Party r

Won £__ , , o

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 H 12 3O

~ ' *2en

Above 50% 144 — 25 — 3 3 — — — 5 180 H

40%-50% . . . . * . 55 — 18 — 3 — — — — 5 81 °

30%-40% 20 — 3 — i _ _ _ _ 6 30 g

20%-30% 1 • — 2 — — — — — — 2 5 £

10%-20% . . . . . 2

0%-10% >

TOTAL: 220 . . 48 . . 7 3 . . . . . . 18 296 "^ , . _ . ^ .„ ; c/i

W

w>—<to

u, GENERAL ELECTONS

* TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972.J3 Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates o

I State—MAHARASHTRA TOTAL SEATS : 270 §

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL >— — — ~ ~ ^ —____ f

Seat Party mWon £

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 " 12 H, , . Q

Above 50% 177 — 1 — 2 2 — 2 FBL 17 210 gj1 SMS H

7 PWP °1 BKD g

40%-50% 37 — 4 — 1 — 1 1 RPI 5 50 w

1 FBL £30%-40% 8 . — — — - — — 1 RPI 1 10 220%-30% £10%-20% • g

0 % - 1 0 % . . . . . W

TOTAL : 222 5 — 3 2 1 14 ** 23 270 I |

**AH India Forward Bloc FBL-3 gw

Republican Party of India RPI-2 rPeasants' and Workers' Party PWP-7 $Shiv Sena SMS-1Bharatiya Kranti Dal , , BKD-1

14

GENERAL ELECTIONS *-

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—-1972.


State—MANIPUR TOTAL SEATS : 60 g—- . . _ , 2

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM M OTHERS IND TOTAL ">

Seat Party ^Won «

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ~ 7 l 12 "

Above 50% 2 . . . . .. . . . . . . 6 MRP 6 14 w

40%—50% 3 1 3 . . 4 MRP 3 14 O

30%—40% 9 . . . . . . 1 1 . . . 2 MRP 4 17 g

20%—30% 2 1 . . . . 1 1 . . 3 MRP 6 14 W

10%—20% 1 1 »

0%-10% . . . . . . . £

, ] >

TOTAL : . . . . . . 17 1 . . . . 3 5 . . 15 **MRP 19 60 g

**Manipur People's Party. >Wg03

' • • ' • • - • 5

• . ; • • • . • ' . - • • _ . ' . • • . • O

GENERAL ELECTIONS

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972.a

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates H

State—MEGHALAYA TOTAL SEATS : 60 g

% . INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL w

Seat Party nWon 2

s1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 w

H

Above 50% 5 . . . . 23 AHL 11 39 g

40%—50% . . . . . . 2 . . . . 6 AHL 2 10 W

30%—40% 1 .. . . . . . . . . . . 3 AHL 6 10 g

20%—30% . • . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . 1 £

10%-20% |

0 % — 1 0 % . . . . . . WI-I i 3 >

T O T A L : . . . . . . 9 . . . . 3 2 * * A H L 1 9 6 0 1

; : g**AU Party Hill Leader's Conference.

>̂~^wen

O N

GENERAL ELECTIONS •£GO



State -MYSORE TOTAL SEATS: 216 g

__ : . . g% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL 2

r*Seat Party wWon g

, _ . _ o1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 §

, , , , . , __ _ _

Above 50% 133 18 . . . . 1 2 . . . . . . 9 163 °

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . . . . 2 6 6 .. . . 1 7 4 0 j j j

30%—40% 6 1 1 .. 1 JPP 3 12 r,

20%—30% _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i 1 I

1 0 % — 2 0 % . . . . . . >

0%-10% §to

T O T A L : 165 . 2 4 . . . . 3 3 . . 1 * * J P P 2 0 2 1 6 J &^ __̂ ffi

**Janata Paksha Party. §• • • • • ' - £

S3

GENERAL ELECTIONS


Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates ^w

State—PUNJAB TOTAL SEATS : 104 g— • — • • — — g

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS 1ND TOTAL r

Seat Party cWon g

, : , H

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 §

. . <n

Above 50% 47 . . . . . . . . 7 1 14 SAD 1 70 O

40%— 50% 17 • . . . . . . . . . 3 .. 8 SAD . . 28 g

30%—40% 2 2 SAD 2 6 W

20%-30% W

10%-20% £

0%—10% . . . . . . . -. H: , , W

TOTAL 66 10 1 24 **SAD 3 104 £CO

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __^ , . _ _ , ___—^—_— ^

**Shiromani Akali Dal. §t-1

>-«w%n

a\

GENERAL ELECTIONS ~o



State—RAJASTHAN TOTAL SEATS : 184 o

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL p5

Seat Party r<Won

, , _ _ _ „_____„ . t"1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 O

• — • • * O

Above 50% 105 . . 1 4 2 1 . . . . . . 6 119 g

40%—50% 30 1 5 5 1 3 . . . . . , 4 49 g

30%—40%' . . . . . . 9 . . 2 2 1 . . . . . . ' . . 1 15 H

20%—30% 1 ••'• 1 w

1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . . . . 5

o % — 1 0 % . . . . . ; a

-̂TOTAL: 145 1 8 11 4 4 . . . . . . . 1 1 184 3

w

CO

W• ""g

D3f

E3

GENERAL ELECTIONS

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972.. . • - , - . . . . . " ' " " ' • " " " • a

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates Ega

State—TRIPURA TOTAL SEATS : 60 £r

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL a, <y o

Seat Party «Won g

• < />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 o '

A b o v e 5 0 % 19 .. , . . . . . . . 10 . . . . 1 30 S

4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . . . 18 .. . . . . . . 1 4 ... . . 1 24 £

3 0 % — 4 0 % . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . 6 S3

2 o % - 3 o % . : •* ;-' - . . . :>

io%-2o% . . . . . ;.. . _ . I0%-10% . • __̂ I

TOTAL 41 . . . . . . . . 1 16 . . . . 2 60 §^ | 03

• • • • • - • • , - - . - - . • . . . . ^

m

_n

t—'

GENERAL ELECTIONS --j



oState—WEST BENGAL TOTAL SEATS : 280 §

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL >

Seat Party 5Won w

_ _______ _________ °1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 O

i , , . . | | | jyj

HAbove 50% 199 1 - - — 31 8 1 WPI 1 241 °4 0 % — 5 0 % . . . . . 16 1 — — — 3 5 3 R S P 4 34 S

1 I G L w1 S U C f,

3 0 % — 4 0 % 1 — — _ _ 1 1 1 I G L 1 5 g20%-30% ' Sj1 0 % - 2 0 % . . . . . >0%—10% Z

T O T A L . . . . . 2 1 6 2 3 5 1 4 7 ** 6 2 8 0 |

. ___̂ ___ w.^. ________ _ . ______ ___ . , ______—_ g

**Workers Party of India **WPI—1 rjRevolutionary Socialist Party RSP—3 3AU India Gorakha League IGL—2 (n-Socialist Unity Centre of India . . . . SUC—1

7

GENERAL ELECTIONS

TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL—1972

Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Candidates o

aState—DELHI TOTAL SEATS : 56 §

joi . >

INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL «y f

Seat Paity nWon H

. °1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 w

. gAbove 50% 37 — 4 _ _ _ 2 _ _ _ i 4 4 g

40%—50% . . ' . . . 4 - 1 _ _ i _ _ _ _ 6 ^

30%—40% - . . . . ' . . 3 1 — — — — — 1 MUL — 5 |

20%—30% - 1 - - - - . - - — — 1 r

10%-20% ti

0%—10% . . . . . W

— . — v>44 2 5 3 1 **MUL 1 56 |

**Indian Union Muslim League. SX/i

*—*—i

GENERAL ELECTIONS -

TO THE STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY—1972 *•Party Position — According to percentage oj'Wotes polled by Elected Candidates

State—GOA, DAMAN & DIU.TOTAL SEATS 30

% INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI . CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL oi w

" - - : - Seat Party §Won • g

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 „

• • • • - .. w

Above 50% 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 13 MAG 1 25 £j10 UGS 3

40%—50% _ _ _ _ _ ' — _ 4 MAG — 4 «>30%—40% . . . . . . — — - — — — - — 1 MAG •— 1 g20%-30% . . .....-- . . . . . . . . . . .. '. • H

10%—20% . . . . . . . go % — 1 0 % . v •- , - , . . -. 1 -

• w

TOTAL : 1 28 ** 1 30 p

** Maharashtrawadi Gomantak MAG-18 ^United Goans (Sequel ia Group)—— •—USG-10 w

- . 28 IsCOfwC/5

GENERAL ELECTIONS


Party position—According to percentage of Votes polled by Elected Condidates §State—MIZORAM g

TOTAL SEATS : 30 £>

% ' INC NCO BJS SWA SP CPI CPM OTHERS IND TOTAL £fi

Seat Party £Won H

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . 10 11 12 §

Above 50% . . . . . . 2 — — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 7 g4 0 % — 5 0 % 3 _ _ _ • _ _ _ _ _ 10 13 H

3 0 % - 4 0 % . . . . . 1 - - _ _ _ _ _ __ 6 7 g2 0 % — 3 0 % . . . . . . — — — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3 3 r

1 0 % - 2 0 % • ' g '0 % — 1 0 % £

. __ ^T O T A L : . . . . 6 — — _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 4 3 O <

.__ wCOCOCOswr5CO

PART—IIIGENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS

177

CHAPTER X

ELECTION EXPENSES

1. "In countries where power is conferred by the votes of thepeople the efforts of parties and candidates are chiefly directed tothe winning of elections. Now elections cost money. Money maylegitimately be spent on them, but if it is spent lavishly, an ad-vantage is given to the rich candidates and to the party whichhas the larger campaign fund. Hence, though there is nothing in-trinsically wrong in flooding a constituency with canvassers, cir-culating an immense mass of printed matter intended to influencethe electors, and spending money in conveying electors to thepolls, British legislation restricts the total expenditure which acandidate may incur, the amount being determined by the num-ber of electors in a constituency."

Viscount Bryce - ModernDemocracies, 1962 Edition(The World Press Private Ltd.)Volume II, pages 527-528.

2. "The problems of licit and illicit election expenses are unending."

Julius Stone - SocialDimensions of Law andJustice (1966), page 318.

Tile problems thrown up by expenditure incurred by candidates andpolitical parties are indeed unending as observed by Julius Stone. Theseproblems have foiled and baffled the efforts made by the law in everycountry to solve them because man can devise means and methods to getout of the clutches of the law to achieve his selfish ends however com-prehensive and ingenious such law may appear to be. If law alone weresufficient to remedy our social ills, then the various offences in the IndianPenal Code would have disappeared from our society long long ago.

By the law in Great Britain the election expenses which may beincurred by a candidate have been fixed with reference to the number ofelectors in a constituency. Thus by section 64 of the U.K. Representationof the People Act, 1949, the maximum amount of election expenses whichmay be incurred by a candidate at an election is in a county constituency£ 750 together with an additional one shilling for every six entries in theregister of electors to be used at the election, and in a borough constituency£ 750, together with an additional one shilling for every eight entries inthe register of electors to be used at an election. The above maximumamount for a candidate at a parliamentary constituency does not cover thecandidate's personal expenses. In Great Britain, the constituencies aresmall. The average electorate of a parliamentary constituency in that

179

180 ELECTION EXPENSES

country is very small as compared to the huge electorate of a parliamentaryconstituency in India. Thus the electorate of a parliamentary constituencyin England is near about 59,000, in Scotland 48,000, in Wales about56,000 and in Northern Islands about 75,000, whereas the electorate in aparliamentary constituency in India is in the neighbourhood of five lakhs.Even if a sum of 10 paise is fixed as the maximum expenditure per elector,even then the total maximum expenditure which a candidate may spendat a parliamentary election comes to fifty lakh paise which is equal to fiftythousand rupees. But this sum may be regarded as too high and there-fore prohibitive so far as the average candidate at a parliamentary electionis concerned. Before the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in 1971,the maximum expenditure which could be incurred by a candidate • at aparliamentary election in a State was by and large twentyfive thousandrupees. This sum was raised to thirtyfive thousand rupees shortly beforethe parliamentary General Election of 1971. But complaints are heard thathaving regard to the size of our parliamentary constituencies as they existat present, the sum of thirtyfive thousand rupees is not quite adequate forcampaign purposes. There appears to be truth in this but if the limit ofmaximum expenditure is raised to fifty thousand rupees at the rate of tenpaise per elector, even that amount, though it is a big amount for a can-didate of moderate means, may not be adequate for purposes of electionpropaganda and campaign in huge parliamentary constituencies in thiscountry. The new parliamentary constituencies which will be delimited onthe basis of the 1971 census figures may contain even larger electoratethan five lakhs. But assuming that the average electorate of the newlydelimited parliamentary constituencies, will be about five lakhs or so, eventhen grievances may be made on the other side that ten paise per elector istoo small and meagre. Thus the whole situation appears to create somesort of vicious circle. If we increase the maximum amount an averagecandidate with limited means will not be able to spend so much and thatwill give an edge to the richer and more affluent candidates. If on thecontrary we keep the maximum amount at what it is today, then the com-plaint will be that it is too small and the candidates are forced by the lawto make false statements in their return of election expenses while spendingmuch larger amounts than rupees thirtyfive thousand. Similar observationswill apply in relation to assembly constituencies where also the limit ofmaximum expenditure was increased by about fifty per cent in 1971. Thusone is faced with the horns of dilemma. If the limit is further raised therewill be complaints; if the limit is not raised there will be grievances.

In addition to the expenses incurred by the candidates themselves,political parties, specially the National and the State parties spend some-times huge amounts on the elections of the candidates sponsored by them.But there is no provision in the law which requires the political parties tosubmit any return of expenses incurred by them on account of, or in theconduct and management of, any election.

In this predicament, the Election Commission in its Report on, theMid-term General Elections 1968-69 as well as in the Draft Bill which itsent to the Government for consideration suggested a number of amend-ments. A good deal of them has been accepted by the Joint Committee

ELECTION EXPENSES 181

of Parliament on Amendments of Election Law. But some others whichthe Commission considers extremely valuable have not been accepted bythe Joint Committee. For example, the Committee has not accepted theproposals of the Commission about the filing of return of election expensesby the political parties but no good ground has been adduced by the Com-mittee for not accepting this highly valuable recommendation. I should onceagain strongly urge that the recommendations of the Election Commissionshould be accepted in toto if some improvement in the position relating to theincurring of expenditure at elections is to be expected and achieved. The Com-mission on its part has done something to bring down the election expendi-ture, licit as well as illicit, by setting up polling stations throughout the countryin much larger numbers. As has been pointed out in a previous Chapter, themaximum distance between a polling station and the voter's residence no-where exceeds 1-114 miles except in a view jungle, hilly or desert areas. Theactual distance in the majority of the cases is one furlong, two furlongs or atthe most half a mile. This being the actual position, very few electors nowavail themselves of free conveyance offered by or on behalf of the candi-dates. Some of the drastic provisions suggested by the Election Commis-sion in relation to the free conveyance of voters have also not been acceptedby the Joint Committee of Parliament, but it is hoped that the Governmentand Parliament will accept them and incorporate them in the Statute Book.

But the Commission should never agree to the suggestions made insome quarters that the provisions relating to the election expenses shouldaltogether be scrapped from the election law. In the opinion of the Com-mission that will be a very dangerous thing and will wide open the flood-gates of corruption and spell disaster for democracy in this country. Itwill also have an effect of driving out every candidate with meagre or mode-rate means from the election arena. That should never happen in a demo-cracy. Therefore, the provisions relating to election expenditure mustremain. The Government and Parliament may, however, consider whe-ther having regard to the very high cost of living now-a-days, the maximumexpenditure should further be increased. Because the provisions of the laware there, there are some people who are afraid of them and think twicebefore incurring expenditure beyond the prescribed maximum or beforemaking false statements in their accounts or returns of election expenses.We should do well to bear in mind what Viscount Bryce said more thanhalf a century ago in this connection. In his book "The American Com-monwealth, (1924 Edition), Vol. II, pages 152-53", he observed asfollows :—

"It is always difficult to estimate the exact value of laws which pro-pose to effect by mechanical methods reforms which in them-selves are largely moral. This much, however, may be said,that while in all countries there is a proportion (varying fromage to age and country to country) of good men who will acthonourably whatever the law, and similarly a proportion ofbad men who will try to break or evade the best laws, thereis also a considerable number of men standing between thesetwo classes, whose tendency to evil is not too strong to berepressed by law, and in whom a moral sense is sufficiently

3 EC/72—13.


present to be capable of stimulation and education by a goodlaw. Although it is true that you cannot make men moral bya statute, you can arm good citizens with weapons which im-prove their chances in the unceasing conflict with the variousforms in which political dishonesty appears. The value ofweapons, however, depends upon the energy of those who usethem."

The Election Commission as already mentioned is in full agreementwith the recommendation of the Joint Committee of Parliament that theminimum campaign period which is at present 20 days between the lastdate of withdrawal of candidatures and the date or the first date of thepoll, should be reduced to 17 days. This will also have the effect of re-ducing election expenditure.

Then, if the account of election expenses is prepared in the form andmanner as recommended by the Election Commission in the Draft Bill aswell as in its Report on the Mid-term General Elections of 1968-69, thenit seems that they will put an effective curb upon the candidates or theirelection agents in incurring expenditure beyond the maximum limit or inpreparing false account or return of election expenses. The recommenda-tion of the Commission that every such account or return should be filedtogether with an affidavit as to the veracity of the account or return swornby the candidate or his election agent before a stipendiary magistrate of thefirst class or a stipendiary presidency magistrate should also be acceptedby Parliament. Before making any such affidavit on solemn affirmation,candidates or their election agents will think twice before making a falsestatement therein.

It is with the object of reducing substantially the corrupt practice ofelection expenditure beyond the maximum limit mentioned in section123(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 that during thelast five years not a single disqualification incurred by any candidate onaccount of exceeding the maximum limit of expenditure has been removedby the Election Commission although the maximum amount involvedin some of these cases was very small and petty. In one case, it wasbelow Rs. 250/- and in another case, it was nearabout Rs. 125|- only.Still the Commission took the harsh step to improve the image of electionsin this country, and it can be said without any fear of contradiction thatthe election in this country is now not less fair and less pure by anystandard than in many countries in the world inspite of the bogus allega-tion as to the rigging of elections. I shall revert to this aspect of thematter in a subsequent chapter.

The electors in this country have become during the last five yearsextermely politically conscious. It is now very difficult to purchase themwith money. This impression I gained when I talked to them in therural areas in different parts of the country. Corruption in elections willdisappear if the economic conditions of our electorate, specially in therural areas, and the level of their education can be improved. In addi-tion, the tradition of moral sense which is ingrained in the rural electorate


under the influence of the high moral and spiritual culture of this countryspreading over a period of at least five thousand years since the days ofthe Rig Veda is even now exercising a good deal of influence over therural electorate so that before succumbing to any temptation they willpause and think as to whether it will be worthwhile their moral and spiri-tual dignity to succumb to such temptation. Swami Vivekananda oncecompared this to the layer of silt deposited by the high tide of the watersof big rivers and seas which sticks to the ground when the waters recedeat the time of the low tide. If we mix with the rural citizens, we caneasily realise this however much the sophisticated town and city cockneymay jeer at them and their simple ways of life.

The two tables below show the maximum amount of expenditure asit was before the amendment of rule 90 of the Conduct of ElectionsRules, 1961 in January, 1971 and as it is after such amendment :

TABLE I

Maximum amount of expenditure which could be incurred by acandidate before amendment of rule 90 in January, 1971 :

House of the People :

(a) Rs. 25,000 in the case of a constituency in any State otherthan the State of Nagaland;

(b) Rs. 10,000, in the case of a constituency in the State ofNagaland or of a constituency in any Union territory.

State Legislative Assemblies :

State/Union territory AmountRs.

I. State1. Andhra Pradesh 7,0002. Assam3. Bihar4. Gujarat5. Haryana6. Kerala7. Madhya Pradesh8. Tamil Nadu9. Maharashtra

10. Mysore11. Nagaland .12. Orissa13. Punjab14. Rajasthan . . . . . . .15. Uttar Pradesh16. West Bengal[I. Union TerritoryI . H i m a c h a l P r a d e s h . . . . . .2 . M a n i p u r . . . .3 . T r i p u r a . . . .4 . G o a , D a m a n & D i u .

6,0008,0008,0006,0007,0007,0009,0008,0006,0001,0007,0007,0006,0009,0007,000

2.0002,0002,0002,000

5. P o n d i c h e r r y 2 ,000


TABLE II

Maximum amount of election expenditure which would be incurred by a candidate after theamendment of rule 90 in 1971

Name of State/Union territory

I. States1. Andhra Pradesh .2. Assam3. Bihar4. Gujarat5. Haryana6. Himachal Piadesh7. Jammu & Kashmir8. Kerala9. Madhya Pradesh

10. MaharashtraII. Manipur12. Meghalaya13. Mysore14. Nagaland .15. Orissa16. Punjab17. Rajasthan .18. Tamil Nadu19. Tripura20. Uttar Pradesh .21. West Ben aa!

j[. Union Territories :

1. Andaman and Nicofaar Islands2. Chandigarh . . . . .3. Dadra & Nagai Haveli4. Delhi5. Goa, Daman & Diu . . . .6. Laccadive, Minicoy and Amindivi Islands7. Mizoram . . . . . .8. Pondicherry . . . . .

Maximum limit ofelection expenses in

any one of

Pariia- Assemblymentaryconsti-tuency

Rs.

35.00035,00035,00035,00035,000

• 35,00025,00035,00035,00035,00017,50017,50035,00015,00035,00035,00035,00035,00017,50035,00035,000

12,50010,0006,000

10.00012,50012,50012,50012,500

consti-tuency

Rs.

10,5009,000

12,00010,5009,0005,000

10,50010,00012,0002,5002,500

10,0002,500

10,50010,00010,00012,0002,500

13,50010,500

3,000

2,5003,000

Expenditure is also incurred by the Government—the State and theCentral, in connection with elections. The expenditure incurred on thepreparation of electoral rolls and conduct of elections is borne initiallyby the State Government but the Central Government contributes one-half of all the expenses incurred by the State Government on the follow-ing items :

(a) election staff employed in the office of the Chief Electoralofficer and in the district offices;

(b) preparation and revision of electoral rolls;

(c) storage and preservation of ballot boxes and other electionmaterials; and


(d) conduct of elections to the House of the People and to theState Legislative Assembly when they are held simultane-ously including the payment of allowances to governmentemployees and other persons placed on election duty.

If elections however are not held simultaneously, the Central Govern-ment bears the entire expenditure in respect of the elections to eitherHouse of .Parliament and the State Government bears it in respect ofelections to the State Legislatures.

The remarks above apply in relation to the Union territories whichhave Legislative Assemblies, Council of Ministers, and consolidated fundsdifferent from the consolidated fund of the Union as they apply in rela-tion to the States.

The expenditure incurred on the Election Commission of India andits Secretariat, the Delimitation Commission and the Presidential and Vice-Presidential elections is borne entirely by the Central Government.

The total expenditure incurred on the preparation and revision ofelectoral rolls and on the conduct of elections to the House of the Peopleand the State Legislative Assemblies of Orissa, Tamil Nadu and WestBengal in 1971 is shows in the Table below :—

TABLE

Statement showing the figures of expenditure incurred on the preparation and revision ofelectoral rolls and the conduct of elections to the House of the People and the State

Legislative Assemblies of Orissa, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal held in 1971

SI. Name of State/Union territoryNo.

Expenditure incurred on

Preparationand revisionof electoralroils.

Conduct ofElections

1. Andhra Pradesh2. Assam .3. Bihar .4. Gujarat5. Haiyana6. Jammu & Kashmir7. Kerala .8. Madhya Pradesh9. Himachal Pradesh .

10. Maharashtra11. Meghalaya12. Mysore13. Nagaland14. Orissa15. Punjab .16. Rajasthan

Rs. P. Rs. P.

45,80,312.0011,83,654.003,73,657.11

12,53,559.374,97,153.003,18,000.00

28,44,000.0014,01,971.006,92 999.00

61,99 915.00(Included in the16,31,700.00

33,340.0014,59.600.0015.75,856.632,25,886.00

1,01,33,970.0018,17,141.00

1,54,89,806.5161,65,691 .796,28,460.004,40,000.00

25,57,000.0056,18 000.004,57,550.00

1,10,76,724.00fissures for the

45,82,200.004,11,900.00

32,40,500.004,97,159.29

32,44,717.00

Total

Rs. P.

1,47,14,282.0030,00,795.00

1,58.63,463.6274,19,251.1611,25.613.007,58,000.00

54,01,000.0070,19.971.0011,50;549.00

1,72,76,639.00State of Assam)

62,13,900.004,45,240.00

47,00,100.0020,73,015.9234,70,603.00


SI.No

17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.

26.27.28.

Name of State/

Tamil NaduUttar PradeshWest BengalAndaman & Nicobar Islands .ChandigarhDadra & Nagar Haveli .DelhiGoa, Daman & DiuLaccadive, Minicoy and Amin-divi IslandsManipur . . . .PondicherryTripura . . . .

TOTAL . . . .

Expenditure incurred on

Preparationand revisionof electoralrolls.

Rs. P.

26,62,9^5.0723,27,6 "0.0025,65,175.00

34,155.0089,085.6215,393.00

12,04,382.9011,155.84

132.5453,068.4822,145.00

1,69,500.00

3,34,26,381.56

Conduct ofElections

Rs. P.

1,16,85,715.621,50,00,000.001,57,40,858.00

1,52,170.0016,688.8722,877.60

3,23,366.001,58,697.66

2,794.487,55,390.521,41,166.585,17,700,00

11,08,78,244.92

Total

Rs. P.

1,43,43,700.691,73,27,600.001,83,06,033.00

1,86,325.001,05,774.49

38,270.6015,27,748.901,69,853.50

2,927 .028,08,459.001,63,311.586,87,200.00

14,43,04,626.48

CHAPTER XI

CORRUPT PRACTICES IN ELECTIONS AND ELECTIONPETITIONS

1. "When all is said, however, it was the members of the House ofCommons who from first to last set the moral tone, unpromptedby outside pressure groups. At the cost of personal sacrifice tosome of its members Parliament managed within one generationto sweep away traditions that were centuries old and were regard-ed by many as well-nigh ineradicable. It is an achievement ofwhich any legislature might well be proud."

—Cornelius O'Leary — TheElimination of Corrupt Practicesin British Elections 1868—1911(1962 Edition), p. 233.

"Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution—

(b) no election to either House of Parliament or to the Houseor either House of the Legislature of a State shall be calledin question except by an election petition presented to suchauthority and in such manner as may be provided for by orunder any law made by the appropriate Legislature."

—Article 329(b) of theConstitution.

Freedom of elections is the fundamental axiom of representativegovernment. As early as 1275 A.D., the Statute of Westminster enactedduring the third year of the reign of Edward I laid down—

"And because elections ought to be free, the King commandethupon great forfeiture, that no man by force of arms nor bymalice or menacing, shall disturb any to make free election."

The primary object of the Law of Elections in every country is tocreate and maintain that sort of atmosphere in which the electorate canchoose their representatives by the exercise of their free will without anypressure or hindrance or undue influence from any quarters. In otherwords, the object of the Law of Elections is to ensure free and fair elec-tions. This is why our Election Law contains in detail various provisionseven though they may appear to be technical to safeguard the purity of

187

188 CORRUPT PRACTICES IN ELECTIONS ANDELECTION PETITIONS

the election process. As was observed by Shah, J. in Harcharan SinghVs. S. Mohinder Singh, (1969) 1 SCA 138 at page 145—

"The primary purpose of the diverse provisions of the election lawwhich may appear to be technical is to safeguard the purityof the election process, and the Courts will not ordinarilyminimise their operation."

It is for the same reason that our election law contains adequateprovisions providing for a number of corrupt practices, as man}1 as 8 atpresent, the commission of which, if proved, in any election petition willrender void the election of the returned candidate. But it should not beforgotten at the same time that an election once held is not to be treatedin a light-hearted manner and defeated candidates or disgruntled electorsbefore filing any election petition challenging any election should do wellto remember that election once held is a most sacred public act—publicact done not by one person, one Minister or one official but by millionsof the people of this country who are the ultimate rulers of this Land.This is why the Courts are very very reluctant to set aside and declarevoid any election which has already been held unless any corrupt practicewhich is alleged in any election petition is proved beyond reasonable doubtas the commission of an offence in a criminal case. This is why theSupreme Court in a large number of cases has held that an election peti-tion in which allegations of corrupt practices are made should be regardedas the proceedings of a quasi-criminal nature in which the strictest proofis necessary.

Evil, ignorance and 'avidya' compel a man to commit corrupt prac-tices and wrong things not only at the time of elections but at any crucialtime, at any critical juncture. Had there been no evil, no ignorance andno other forces which tend to drag us behind, then there would have beenno raison d'etre for this Samsara, this Creation. But though involved inignorance and darkness and quite often troubled within by evil propen-sities to do wrong and mischief, the inner sense of the good, the innermoral sense implanted in the heart of every man ("hridi sannivishtah").always impels him to shake off all such evil propensities and the animaland demoniac impulses which may spur him to wrong-doing and mis-chief-making. The greater the obstacles on the way, the greater and moreintense has been man's determination to overcome them. Man is atendency which like the fast flowing current of the river having its sourcein the high Himalayas always moves towards the vast ocean. But pro-gress is cyclical. There are ups and downs. Rotation, said Emerson,is the law of nature. And man is not above and beyond nature. Whilethus 'avidya' and 'vidya' must remain side by side, it is the destiny of manto try to keep 'avidya' under the control of 'vidya' as far as possible sothat he may make his life richer and better in all its aspects. Two oppos-ing impulses always pull us in contrary directions and darken our senseof the good; these are 'kama' (desire, attraction etc.) on the one handand 'krodha' (anger, aversion or repulsion) on the other. This has beenbeautifully put in the quick dialogue between Arjuna and Sri Krishna in

CORRUPT PRACTICES IN ELECTIONS AND 189ELECTION PETITIONS

the Gita preached in the clangs and clinks of the battle-field and not inthe serene atmosphere of the hermitage. Arjuna asked the question—"Impelled by what does man take to wrong, doing even unwillingly, asthough driven by force ?" Sri Krishna replied—"It is desire, it is anger,begotten of the quality of 'rajas', insatiable and grossly wicked; know yethis to be the enemy here." At the base of all our individual and socialvices and evils is the play and interplay of these two insatiable and irresis-tible opposing forces. The same idea has been expressed in recent timesby Bertrand Russell in his "New Hopes For A Changing World", andalthough he expressed it in connection with sex attraction and jealousy,the idea holds good generally. Russell says—

"The two impulses of attraction and jealousy, therefore, are bothdangerous and if you wish to slip through life5 safely, youmust learn to control them."

—(p. 175—m the Chapter on "Fear")

150 years before Russell, the greatest modern Philosopher, ImmanuelKant said towards the end of his First Critique (the Critique of PureReason)—

"A will is purely animal (arbitrium brutum) when it is determinedby sensuous impulses or instincts only, that is, when it isdetermined in a pathological manner. A will which can bedetermined independently of sensuous impulses and consequ-ently by motives presented by reason alone, is called a freewill (arbitrium liberum); and everything which is connectedwith this free will either as principle or consequence, is termedpractical. The existence of practical freedom can be provedfrom experience alone. For the human will is not determinedby that alone which immediately affects the senses; on thecontrary, we have the power, by calling up the notion of whatis useful or hurtful in a more distant relation, of overcomingthe immediate impressions on our sensuous faculty of desire.But these considerations of what is desirable in relation toour whole state, that is, is in the. end good and useful, arebased entirely upon reason. This faculty, accordingly,enounces laws which are imperative or objective laws of freedomand which tell us what ought to take place, thus dis-tinguishing themselves from the laws of nature which relate tothat which does not take place. The laws of freedom or of freewill are hence termed practical laws."

—[page 235 of Volume 42 (Kant)in series 'Great Books of theWestern World'].

The real secret lies here. It is to bring about harmony betweendesire and anger, attraction and repulsion so that neither of these oppos-ing impulses could play havoc in man's life, individual or social. Tobring about such harmony requires a good deal of self-control.


The forces of 'avidya' and evil have their full play in the practicalgame of politics. Love of power offers the greatest attraction to thegenerality of mankind, including politicians. Politics is the art and prac-tice of dealing with power of the most powerful of human associations,namely, the State. Election is the political battle for gaining this power.A politician without love of power is a contradiction in terms. Poweris the great deluder. Election is the pursuit of political power. Whoeveris involved in this pursuit is by the innate structure of his lower naturequite often driven to adopt mean tactics and foul means. Even the greatYudhisthira had to utter a half truth for gaining victory. Then again byihe innate structure of his nature, man has a tendency to see and magnifyothers' faults and defects and quite often behaves in an ostrich like mannerand refuses to see and admit reality of things. Politics is concerned withpower par excellence. Love of power, the famous British Statesman Vis-count Bolingbroke said many years back, is natural, it is insatiable, almost-onstantly whetted and never cloyed by passion. The ultimate aim ofevery person engaged in politics is to acquire political power and for thatpurpose, some politicians do not even hesitate to adopt any means, however,foul and corrupt it may be, and if they fail to acquire power, the irresisti-ble impulse of anger over-powers them with the result that they lose sightof reason and moral sense and are carried away by their animal impulsesand instincts and begin to heap all blame on others for their failure in ac-quiring power.

But power in politics is absolutely necessary because power has itsbright side also. Power heightens sensitiveness, it stimulates the imagina-tion of purposes and expedients; it gives incentives to men with power todo noble and great things beneficial to the community; it increases com-passion when it places men where they can confront sorrows, whicfi gov-ernment exists to assuage and mitigate. It helps men to think, to chose, toendeavour towards the conquest of misery and the discovery of truth.Without power the wicked would not be punished, without power justicewould become sterile. But unless power is wedded to the moral sense, thesense of the good, then, power may cause havoc in men's lives by blindingtheir eyes against the light of reason and justice. This is why since timeimmemorial, India has emphasised the union of power ('Shakti') with thesense of the good ('Shiva'). The Rig Veda in Shukta 83 of the first Mandalspeaks of "Bhadra Shakti", that is, power which is good and beneficial toall concerned. In other words, power and justice, Shiva and Shakti mustbe joined together if welfare of the individual and the community is to beobtained from the use of power. As Pascal said in his Pensees (Thoughts) —

"Justice without power is unavailing; Power without justice istyrannical. Justice without power is gainsaid because thewicked always exist; power without justice is condemned. Wemust, therefore, combine justice and power, making what isjust strong, and what is strong just."

In this background, the problems, real, alleged and imaginary, of elec-tions, are to be considered. Election is only one aspect of our multi-faced


political, social and economic life. Election is the process of acquiringpolitical power in a manner which if correctly understood, followed andpractised by all concerned makes possible the emergence of political powerwith the goodwill of all concerned thereby tending to make acquisition ofthe State-power by any party acceptable to all other parties with goodgrace. For this what is essential is the presence of goodwill on the partof all politicians and political parties and all other concerned. Kant saidthat no good quality of the head or the heart, such as intelligence, wit,judgment and other talents of the mind or courage, resolution, perseveranceand other qualities of temperament, cannot be called good unless there isthe goodwill underlying these qualities and attributes. These gifts of naturemay become extremely bad and mischievous in the absence of the willwhich is to make use of them and which, therefore, constitutes what iscalled character. It is the same with the gifts of fortune. Power, riches,honour and even health and the general well-being and contentment with-out a goodwill at their base, inspire pride and conceit. Therefore, the pre-sence of a goodwill appears to constitute the indispensable condition inevery sphere of human activity including politics and elections. In theabsence of goodwill, rancour is bound to arise in the minds of those whoare defeated at the poll. In such a case, such defeated party and itscandidates instead of trying to find out their defects and weaknesses intheir own election activities and campaign, and various other matters re-lated to elections, always try to blame other persons and agencies for theirfailure. The conduct of such parties and candidates may be compared tothe attitude of those students who having failed in their examination tryto place the blame for their failure on the paper-setters and examiners.This attitude is particularly noticeable in this country. I do not knowwhether this augurs well for the future of politics in this country. Absenceof rancour is a great quality in any man. Alongwith other qualities of headand heart it may tend to change a politician into a statesman. It hasbeen said of Winston Churchill that he was singularly free from rancour.

The first essential pre-condition in any country at any time is the up-lifting of the tone and standard of public morality and honesty. Thepresent age throughout the democratic world is an age of anger, violenceand vituperation, and of permissiveness and indiscipline in every sphere oflife and conduct. I am not speaking of morality in the traditional andconventional sense. Far from it, I am referring to the moral sense whichis ingrained in every man's heart. If this moral sense which lies in a dor-mant state at the time of elections or at any other critical time can beroused, if public conscience can be created against mean, corrupt, mis-chievous and foul practices in our political life at the time of elections,then tone and standard of public and electoral morality is bound to rise.Here a great moral responsibility lies on the political parties and candidatesduring their election campaign and propaganda. That is the time whenthey get ample opportunity to do so. Criticism of policies, promises, pro-grammes and performances of other parties or of the public conduct ofother candidates must be there in election time. But if false and maliciousallegations against other parties and candidates are made regarding theirpolicies, programmes and performances or if they indulge in characterassassination, then not only there is infraction of the law but there is alsoa tendency towards the lowering of the public moral standard.


The law has provided ample safeguards against evil and corrupt practi-ces. But parlies and candidates and their agents sometimes do not hesitateto indulge in them in disregard of the law. A little more than three yearsback, a member of Parliament came to my house at night to make com-plaints against a contesting candidate in a keenly contested bye-election ina parliamentary constituency that on behalf of that candidate ten rupee noteswere being distributed among the electors of that parliamentary constituencynumbering about four lakhs like black berries. Assuming that the complaintwas true, the corrupt practice of bribery was committed on such colossalscale that no election machinery, no police or no other agency would beable to do anything. If men are set on wrong doing, no law, no court, nopolice, no Election Commission or no election machinery can stop themfrom doing so. Moreover only rich people can afford to give bribe tolakhs and lakhs of electors throughout a parliamentary constituency; andin a country where even now about 44 per cent of the total population livebelow the poverty line, the poor electors do not mind accepting a gift offive or ten rupees or even more for going to the polling station to cast hisvote. The voter may actually see little harm in making something out ofhis vote. But as I have already pointed out, the voter in this country isnow politically very conscious and clever so much so that he may takemoney from one candidate, but vote for another. There is no certaintythat the voter can be purchased. This is true not only with respect to theIndian voter steeped in poverty and ignorance but also with respect tovoters in other countries. Therefore, for the corrupt practice of briberyresponsibility lies mainly upon the rich and affluent candidates and theirsupporters and sponsors. Many years back Viscount Bryce speakingabout money power in politics said in his "Modern Democracies".

"So long as private property exists, there will be rich men, readyto corrupt, and other men, rich as well as poor, ready to becorrupted, for 'the love of money is the root of all evil'."

And mind you, Bryce was neither a socialist nor a communist; he was astaunch Gladstonin liberal. We should not forget that the corrupter ismuch more to blame than the corrupted.

Or" take the case of booth-capturing by mobs of hooligans andgoondas armed with lathis, rifles and other lethal weapons. This happensspecially in Bihar. This menace has been in vogue in Bihar for quitesome time. I understand, at least since the Second General Election of1957. Politicians and their workers and supporters belonging mainly tothree dominant castes, to whatever party or parties they may belong,take a leading part in arranging or instigating booth-capturing by organisedgoondas and hoodlums in large numbers, with the result that in a goodnumber of cases reports are received from the presiding officers andreturning officers necessitating repoll or fresh poll in the polling stationsconcerned. Now unless the politicians and political parties not only desistfrom indulging in this nasty practice at elections but also openly denounceit with united voice in unequivocal terms, no arrangement can eradicatethis evil. But if at the time of election people do not hesitate to throw


away all norms of good conduct and decent behaviour, then it wouldbecome extremely difficult to eliminate this evil practice from our elections.To stop this practice, poll in Bihar has all along been staggered and spreadon a number of days except during the Mid-term General Election in 1969when it was taken on a single day. Even in the last assembly General Elec-tions in March, 1972, poll was spread over as many as four days throughoutthe State with intervals of 2 days in between so that police personnel in largenumbers might be employed on the day of poll at each polling station,but even then booth-capturing could not be entirely avoided. It is very easyto rouse feelings of hatred and enmity among the various sections of thepeople, most of whom are illiterate and steeped in centuries-old supersti-tions and blind traditions which more often than not even pass for religion.These feelings of hatred and enmity among different castes and communitiesonce raised are difficult to quench and assuage. The famous historian, LordActon in his 'History of Freedom', while dealing with 'Freedom in Antiquitysaid : —

'The most certain test by which we judge whether a country isreally free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities,(page 4) .

Those who indulge in these things are real enemies of the country becauseby their action they bring about disunity among the people and thwartthe process of national integration.

If the number of election petitions and the decisions of the courtsthereon and the number and nature of complaints received on the eveof and during the election be any indication, as they are in GreatBritain, then, the conclusion becomes almost irresistible that our electionsduring 1971-1972 were far cleaner, freer and fairer than they were atany of the previous general elections held during the period from 1952to 1967 as the following tables will show: —

TABLE T—Lok Sabha1. 1952 392. 1957 593. 1962 464. 1967 515. 1971 58*

*N.B.—A good number of these election petitions were based on the allegation of chemicaltreatment of ballot papers and of the illegality of the new counting procedure.If we omit them out of the count, then the total number of election petitionswould not be more than 40 or 45.

TABLE II—Legislative Assemblies

1. 19522. 19573. 19624. 19675. 1972

286413309345257

N.B.—If to the number of election petitions filed in 1972 (namely 257) we add the numberof petitions filed after Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections in 1969 (39), the KeralaAssembly elections in 1970(5), the Orissa Assembly elections in 1971(8), andTamil Nadu Assembly elections in 1971 (18), then the total number conies to327.


The following Table shows the State and Union territorywise break-up of election petitions filed and how many of these petitions have beendisposed of and how many of them are still pending. It will be seenthat out of the 58 election petitions filed challenging elections to the LokSabha, 50 have already been disposed of; of them 8 were withdrawn bythe petitioners and as many as 41 have been dismissed by the HighCourts. Only in one case the election was set aside and that was alsoon a point of law. This was the case of Mrs. Jehanara Jaipal. Singhwhere the question was whether a non-Munda woman married to a Mundaman which was approved and sanctioned by the Tribal Panchayat, be-came a Munda. Following its earlier decision given in respect of a bye-election from Bihar which was upheld by the Supreme Court in, N.E.Hora vs. Jehanara Jaipal Singh (1972) ISCA. 558, the High Court ofPatna found that Mrs. Jehanara Jaipal Singh, though she was a non-Munda became a Munda on her marriage with the late Mr. Jaipal Singhand therefore her nomination paper was wrongly rejected by the returningofficer. On this ground the election was set aside. The appeal againstthis decision is still pending in the Supreme Court.

In no other case any of the elections has been set aside and declaredvoid. All the allegations of corrupt practices were negatived by theCourts in all the cases so far disposed of by the Courts:

TABLE

StatornJHt showiagtrwnuLrnbjr of Election Petitions and Election appeals filed, number disposed of by way of dismissal/declaring the electionvoid and nucabsr pending in various High Comts and Supreme Court as on 31-12-1972.

HOUSE O F THE PEOPLE 1971 — GENERAL ELECTION

Nirns of State/ Election Petitions in the High Court Election appeals in the Supreme Court . n

Union territory ———•— §Filed With- Dis- Election Pending Filed With- Dis- Election Pending §

drawn missed set aside • - drawn missed set aside TJ- H

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 1 J

a soAndhra Pradesh . . 2 2 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . gnAssam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • Q nBihar . . . . 1 0 . . 7 1 2 3 . . . . . . 3 5 »G u j a i a t . . . . 2 .. 2 .. .. . . . . . . . . . . z ^H a r y a n a 2 . . 2 . . . . 1 1 . . . . g Z

H i m a c h a l P r adesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t i t - 1

J a m m u & K a s h m i r . . 1 . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g oK e r a l a . . . . 1 . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . g gM a d h y a P r a d e s h . . 6 . . 6 . . . . 4 . . 2 . . 2 SM a h a r a s h t r a . . . 5 2 3 . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1 > .M y s o r e . . . . 6 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . §O r i s s a . . . . 2 1 1 . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1P u n j a b . . . . 4 . . 3 . . 1T a m i l N a d u . . . 3 2 1R a j a s t h a n . . . .U t t a r P r a d e s h . . . 6 . . 5 . . 1 2 .. 1 . . 1W e s t B e n g a l ^ A ^ _ . . 1 . . _ _ 3 _ _ . . _ ._. _ _ _ . . ._. .._

H—*

Name of State/ Election Petitions in the High Court Election appeals in the Supreme Court oUnion territory • •

Filed With- Dis- Election Pe.iding Filed With- Dis- Election Pending

drawn missed set aside drawn missed set aside

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5

A & N Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . . .Chandigarh . . .

Dadra & Nagar Haveli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . • • • ODelhi . . . . 3 - . . 3 . . . . 2 . . 1 . . 1 *Goa, Daman & Diu . 1 . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . •• . . J2 -oL. M. & A Islands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " ^Manipur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ti soPondicherry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'z, nT r i p u r a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >•« ̂

T O T A L : . . 5 8 8 4 1 1 8 1 4 1 4 . . 9 3 "

STATEMENT SHOWING THE NUMBER. OF ELECTION PETITIONS AND ELECTION APPEALS FILED, NUMBER DISPOSED g wOF BY WAY OF DISMISSAL/DECLARING THE ELECTION VOID AND NUMBER PENDING IN VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AND w

SUPREME COURT AS ON 31-12-1972. HLegislative Assembly—General Elections—-Orissa, Tamil Nadu & West Bengal, 197] ̂ §

C/"J

State Fi led Wi th - Dismissed Elec . set Pend ing Filed Wi th - Dis- Elec. set Pending %

d r a w n aside in S.C. d r a w n missed aside a

Or i s sa ' . . . . 8 1 4 . . 3 2 1 . . . . 1Tamil N a d u . . . 18 10 7 1 . . 2 . . . . . . 2West Bengal . . . 9 . . . . . . 9

TOTAL : . . 35 t l 7 l 1 Tl 4 1 7 77 3̂


In all 257 election petitions have been filed after the Fifth GeneralElections to the various Legislative Assemblies in 1972 but so far theCommission has been able to gather, only 9 out of these election peti-tions have been disposed of uptill now. From whatever informationreceived so far it appears that all the 9 election petitions have been dis-missed. Thus if the election petitions are any indication then one caneasily draw the conclusion that elections in our country are graduallybecoming more cleaner, freer and fairer.

In Great Britain, there has not been a single election petition onthe allegation of corrupt practice since the year 1911. Therefore, it isclaimed that corrupt practices have been completely eliminated fromBritish elections. Those who make the novel allegation of rigging fullyknow this. Therefore, instead of saying so much now a days aboutindividual corrupt practices, they now speak mainly of rigging but withthis, I shall deal later on in this Report.

Again, if the number of complaints received during the parliamentaryelections in 1971 and assembly elections in 1972 be any indication, thenthe clear indication is that elections have not become that unclean assome people try to make them appear. Formerly, during the electionperiod, including the day of poll, complaints in the shape of letters andtelegrams used to be received in the Election Commission at the timeof every general election in thousands and thousands. But at the time ofthe Lok Sabha elections in 1971, the total number of complaints from theentire country were 2092 only and at the time of the assembly electionsin 1972 the total number was still less—it was only 1433. And thesecomplaints have been classified in the Commission under the followingbroad heads:—

1. Omission of names from and inclusion of bogus entries inelectoral rolls.

2. Transfer of officers on the eve of elections.3. Participation by Government employees in elections.4. Abuse of Government machinery by ministers, etc.5. Partisan attitude of Government officers employed on election

duty.6. Printing and publishing of objectionable posters, pamphlets,

etc.7. Intimidation and coercion of voters at polling stations, etc.8. Impersonation of voters.9. Disturbances at meetings etc., and maintenance of law and

order.10. Complaints of other miscellaneous character.

Therefore, from the number of complaints and the nature thereofalso one will not be justified legally or morally to come to the conclusionthat our elections are becoming more unfair and unclean.

3 EC/72—14.


But how can we expect that elections will be absolutely and totallycorruption-free when the whole country in every sphere and departmentof life and activity is plunged in the ocean of corruption. It is every-body's complaint that there is no business, trade or industry where black-marketing or bribery is not practised. Some time back 1 read in thenewspapers that while people in various parts of the country were dyingof heat stroke and for want of water and rain during the peak period ofthe heat, black marketing in the sale of ice flourished briskly. I havefurther seen reports in the press that there was corruption even in theadmission of students in certain universities and colleges and we hearso much of tax evasion on gigantic scale and of course the C.B.I, reportsshow the extent of corruption among the Govt. employees. It is difficultto find any single sphere of social and corporate life where corruptionhas not spread its tentacles. Remove corruption in general and corrup-tion in election will be a thing of the past.

In the next place, parties and candidates and politicians should dowell to remember that apart from all moral considerations even considera-tions of pure self-interest suggest that corrupt practices in elections shouldbe eliminated. Newton's Third Law of Motion would appear applicablehere also. Every action has its equal and opposite reaction. If you tryto win election by bribery, by force, by intimidation or violence or bystirring up narrow sentiments of caste, community, religion or by abuse ofofficial machinery, then your opponents also will try as far as possibleto do the same either in that election or in any subsequent election andpay you back in your own coin and thereby neutralise your action. Ifyou give bribes to voters, then every other party also will be inclinedto do so. If you have recourse to violence, you will thereby incite othersto practise the same thing eithet now or on the next occasion. This willthus start a vicious competition to do evil things among political parties.In this whichever party is stronger or more resourceful for the time beingmay obtain the desired results for some time but ultimately it will bringabout ruination of all those who indulge in these activities because byevil means and methods lasting good of the country cannot be broughtabout. At least that is not the lesson of history. Thus, even from thestandpoint of self-interest the parties, candidates and others should desistfrom resorting to evil and corrupt practices in elections.

With united efforts this is possible, this can be done and corruptioncan be eliminated from this land.

CHAPTER XII

INNOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS

1. "He laboured, He practised penances and He became tired andheated. Out of Him thus tired and heated cameforth fame andvalour."

—Brihadaranyak Upanishad

I. "This inflated collective method of policy-making has three re-sults, First of all, it makes sustainedthinking impossible. It may seem like belaboring the obvious tosay that great political decisions require sustained and solitarythought .

"Second, the collective method of policy-making is hostile to newdepartures because it tends toward the establishment of con-sensus at the lowest common denominatorThe collectivity pulls the incompetent up — and the innovatordown — to its own level of unoffending mediocrity. After all,innovation is typically the achievement of one man who takes therisks and seeks the rewards, not of a faceless collectivity."

—Hans J. Morgenthau, Truth and Power, (The Pall Mall PressLimited, London) (1970), pages 180-181.

After the Fourth General Elections of 1967, a number of innovationsand improvements in our election practice and procedure were introduced.They may be recounted as follows:

(1) Tying of ballot boxes after the close of the poll with silkribbon and sealing the knots thereof and thereafter puttingthe ballot boxes in strong gunny or cloth bags—the jointsbeing stitched and sealed by the presiding officers and thecandidates or their agents present at the polling stations;

(2) Signatures in full of the presiding officers on the back of theballot papers before such papers are issued to voters;

(3) Reduction of distance between the voter's residence and thepolling station where he is required to go to cast his vote;

(4) The new marking instruments by which voters are required tomark the ballot papers in the screened compartment of thepolling station;

(5) Mixing of ballot papers contained in ballot boxes at all thepolling stations within an assembly constituency before thecommencement of scrutiny of the ballot papers and countingof votes;

199

200 INNOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS

(6) Issue of secret seals by the Commission to the ReturningOfficers for sealing after the declaration of the results thepackets of used and unused ballot papers, packets of counter-foils of ballot papers and packets of other important electionpapers;

(7) Ballot papers with counterfoils; and(8) Revision of electoral rolls in accordance with the system of

'electoral cards'.

It is proposed to deal with each one of them briefly.

(1) Tying of ballot boxes after the close of the poll with silk ribbonand sealing the knots thereof and thereafter putting the ballot boxes instrong gunny or cloth bags—the joints being stitched and sealed by thepresiding officers and the candidates or their agents present at the pol-ling stations :

Complaints used to be received after the Fourth General Election of1967 mainly from the Kashmir Province of the State of Jammu andKashmir about the tampering of the ballot boxes after the completion ofthe poll. Such complaints were made to the Chief Election Commissionerverbally by some leading politicians of the province on a number ofoccasions. I explained to them that no ballot box closed after the com-pletion of the poll could be tampered with unless the numbered paperseal printed at the Central Government Security Press at Nasik and in-serted in the ballot box before the commencement of poll had beenbroken. The paper seal is required to be signed by the polling agentspresent and also by the presiding officer on the white surface of the paperseal. After the ballot box has been sealed with the paper seal, it issimply impossible for any person to open the ballot box without break-ing or damaging that seal. On the paper seal the name of the ElectionCommission is microprinted as in the case of bank cheques. A regularaccount of the paper seals is kept by the Returning Officer. As a matterof fact, on the eve of the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in1971, a correspondent of the Manchester Guardian was shown an emptyballot box. It was closed with the paper seal and then he was asked toopen it without breaking the paper seal. He was not successful andthen he told me that not even one-tenth of the precaution was taken inGreat Britain for securing the ballot box in such a manner. I have shownthis to other foreign visitors and also the visitors who had come to theElection Commission from various parts of the country but none ofthem inspite of their ingenuity and skill could open the ballot box withoutbreaking the paper seal. But the politicians from Kashmir would notbe satisfied and then I told them that I shall try to make some furtherimpiovement in regard to the securing of the ballot boxes. After care-ful thought it was decided that every ballot box used at a polling stationshould after the close of the poll be tied with a silk ribbon and the knotsshould be sealed and thereafter the ballot box should be put in a stronggunny or cloth bag and then the joints should be stitched and sealed bythe seals of the presiding officer and the candidates or their polling agentswho might be present at the polling station. This satisfied those who

INNOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS 201

raised objections as to the tampering of the ballot boxes and after theintroduction of this innovation, hardly any complaint is now receivedfrom any part of the country about such tampering.

(2) Signatures in full of the presiding officers on the back of the bal-lot papers :

To stop the allegation that sometimes spurious ballot papers areinserted in the ballot boxes even during the course of the poll, directionswere issued to the presiding officers throughout the country that beforeissuing the ballot papers to the voters, each ballot paper should be signedin full on its back by the presiding officer and the relevant rule wasamended. Under rule 38 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, itis now specifically provided. It however, came to the notice of theCommission that some presiding officers used to sign a large number ofballot papers during the night previous to the commencement of the poll.Suitable directions were immediately issued that the presiding officersshould put their signatures in full on the back of the ballot papers onlyabout an hour or so before the commencement of the poll and neverearlier. They were also told that they should not sign more than a limi-ted number of ballot papers, say, 50 ballot papers, at a time. This hasalso practically eliminated complaints as to the bogus voting or as to theinsertion of spurious ballot papers into the ballot boxes because at thetime of counting, the Returning Officer is required to reject a ballotpaper which does not contain on its back the signature of the presidingofficer or the distinguishing mark of the polling station. Thus rule56(2) (h) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 provides that theReturning Officer shall reject a ballot paper if it does not bear both themark and the signature which it should have borne under the provisionsof sub-rule (1) of rule 38. The rule, however, provides that where thereturning officer is satisfied that such defect has been caused by any mis-take or failure on the part of the presiding officer or the polling officer,the ballot paper should not be rejected merely on the ground of suchdefect. Obviously this can apply only to individual ballot papers. Thereturning officer however has no liberty to accept as valid large numberof ballot papers if they do not bear both the distinguishing mark and thesignature of the presiding officer as required by sub-rule ( ] ) of rule 38of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961.

(3)Reduction of distance between the voter's residence and thepolling station to which he is assigned :

At the time of the Fourth General Election of 1967, the maximumdistance between a voter's residence and the polling station to which hewas assigned for the purpose of casting his vote was three miles. In1968, it was reduced from three miles to two miles and before the FifthGeneral Election of 1971, it was reduced from two miles to two kilo-metres, that 1-1/4 miles. This has definitely reduced to a large extentthe corrupt practice of free conveyance of voters to the polling stationsby or on behalf of the candidates.

202 INNOVATIONS ANp IMPROVEMENTS

(4) New marking instruments for marking the ballot papers by voters :

Formerly a number of ballot papers used to be rejected on the ground3f double marking by voters on the ballot papers although in fact thevoters concerned might have put only one mark on one symbol. Thisconfusion used to arise because in a number of cases the real mark put bya voter and the smudge left by the mark sometimes used to look equallyprominent and bright. In a good number of cases the smudge would fallon the symbol of another candidate so that prima facie it would appear thata voter has actually put two voting marks on the ballot paper on thesymbols of two contesting candidates. After a good deal of thought andinvestigation, a new marking instrument has been devised with the resultthat any voting mark put by a voter with this new marking instrument caneasily be distinguished from the smudge left by it. The reason is this.In the original mark arrow mark is shown anti-clockwise whereas the arrowmark in the smudge left by the original mark at a different place in theballot paper is shown clockwise. It is therefore, very easy for the returningofficer at the time of counting to see which is the real mark and whichis the smudge. The rejection of ballot papers on this account has beenaltogether eliminated.

(5) Mixing of ballot papers before counting :

This is another highly salutary innovation which was introduced inour election law on the eve of the Fifth General Election to the LokSabha. This has eliminated to a large extent pre-election intimidationand post-election victimisation of voters belonging to the weaker, poorerand smaller sections of the community. I shall deal with this point ina subsequent chapter in greater detail.

(6) Issue of secret seals by the Commission to the Returning Offi-cers for sealing after the declaration of results the packets of usedand unused ballot papers, packets of counterfoils of ballot papersand packets of other important election papers :

This device of secret seals has been introduced by the Commissionto do away with the possibility of tampering with the ballot papers andother important election papers after the counting of votes and declarationof results. In one case in a State, it was found that after the declarationof the results, packets in which the used ballot papers were kept weretampered with and the ballot papers which had been counted and on the.basis of which the result of the election had been declared, had been takenout of those packets and on many of the ballot papers which were acceptedas valid by the returning officer at the time of counting, a double votingmark was placed on the symbol of another candidate on the ballot paper.Now, the law is that a ballot paper which contains double voting mark onit must be rejected. By having recourse to this heinous and nefariouspractice, attempts were made to make out a case that there were seriousdefects and mistakes in the counting by acceptance of those ballot papersas valid. An election petition was filed and this contention was found bythe courts to be valid although the Supreme Court ruled that it wasdifficult to fix the responsibility for this misdeed on any particular officerwithout further detailed investigation. To avoid recurrence of cases like


this, the Commission introduced the device of secret seals. A secretseal is sent in a sealed cover to every returning officer just on the eve ofthe poll. After the counting is over and the result of an election is de-clared in a constituency, under the rules, the returning officer is requiredto place the ballot papers, used and unused, their counterfoils and otherelection papers in separate packets. These packets are sealed and keptin a bigger receptacle like the steel trunk or box or strong gunny bagswhich in their turn are also sealed. All these seals on the packets andon the steel trunks or boxes or gunny bags are sealed by the returningofficers and by the candidates or their agents who like to affix their seals.Now under the directions of the Commission, the returning officer is re-quired to seal the packets with the secret numbered seal of the ElectionCommission as also the trunks, boxes or gunny bags in which they arekept. After the sealing has been done with the secret seals of the return-ing officers and the seals of the candidates or their agents, immediatelythereafter the returning officer is required to send the secret seal to theElection Commission as quickly as possible. A regular register is main-tained in the Election Commission of the secret seals with their numbersissued to the respective returning officers. If on any subsequent occasionunder the orders of any court these packets are required to be opened,then after the contents taken out are put in new packets those new pack-ets are required to be sealed by a different secret seal sent by and obtainedfrom the Commission bearing a different number. The adoption of this devicehas practically eliminated the chances of tampering with the packets contain-ing the ballot papers and other important election papers after the declara-tion of the results.

(7) Ballot papers with counterfoils:

This innovation was introduced after the Fifth General Election tothe Lok Sabha. I received suggestion from some well-known person thatit was high time that the Commission introduces ballot papers withcounterfoils. A decision was therefore, taken that this should be done.Ballot papers with counterfoils are in vogue in Great Britain and in manyother countries. It is felt that ballot papers with counterfoils are a defi-nite improvement in the practice and procedure of our election.

Before the introduction of the system of ballot papers with counter-foils, at the time of issuing a ballot paper to a voter, one of the pollingofficers had to record the serial number of the ballot paper against theentry relating to the voter in the marked copy of the electoral roll [videquondam rule 38(2) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961]. Thatrule was as follows :

"38(1)

(2) At the time of issuing a ballot paper to an elector, thepolling officer shall record the serial number thereof againstthe entry relating to the elector in the marked copy of theelectoral roll."

204 INNOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS

Consequently, the name and other particulars of the elector and the serialnumber of the ballot paper issued to him would be seen side by side.Under the system in vogue at present, the serial number of the ballotpaper issued to the elector will not be entered against his name in themarked copy of the electoral roll. Only the name of the elector to whoma ballot paper has been issued will be underlined in the marked copyof the electoral roll to indicate that a ballot paper has been issued to him.Present rule 38(2) reads inter alia as follows :

"38(2) At the time of issuing a ballot paper to an elector, thepolling officer shall—

(a) record on its counterfoil the electoral roll number of theelector as entered in the marked copy of the electoral roll;

(b) obtain the signature or thumb impression of that electoron the said counterfoil; and

(c) mark the name of the elector in the marked copy of theelectoral roll to indicate that a ballot paper has been issuedto him, without however recording therein the serial numberof the ballot paper issued to that elector :

Provided that no ballot paper shall be delivered to an electorunless he has put his signature or thumb impression on thecounterfoil of that ballot paper."

This procedure has completely eliminated the chance, if any, of connectinga particular ballot paper with the elector to whom it was issued. Underthe system of ballot paper with counterfoil, which was followed in thelast Assembly General Elections in 16 States and 2 Union territories, heldin March, 1972, the electoral number ot the voter, as entered in the elec-toral roll, is entered in the counterfoil and the voter's signature or thumbimpression is taken on the counterfoil before the ballot paper is detachedfrom the counterfoil and issued to the elector. The counterfoil of a ballotpaper contains the Part number of the electoral roll and the serial numberof the elector in the electoral roll (but not his name), the serial numberof the ballot paper and signature or thumb impression of the elector.The chances of identifying a particular elector and the ballot paper issuedto him from these mere numbers are very much less than previously whenthe name of the elector and the serial number of the ballot paper wereshown side by side in the marked copy of the electoral roll.

After the close of the poll the presiding officer of the polling stationis peremptorily required by rule 46 of the Conduct of Elections Rules,1961, to keep inter alia the marked copy of the electoral roll in a separatepacket and the counterfoils of the used ballot paper in another separatepacket. Each such packet is required to be sealed with the seals of thepresiding officer and with seals either of the candidates or of their electionagents or of their polling agents who may be present at the polling stationand may desire to affix their seals thereon. These two sealed packets arenot opened at the time of counting because these two packets have nothingto do with the counting of votes. After the counting of votes has been


over and the result of the election has been decided, these two packetsalong with the packets containing other election papers are kept in thesafe custody of the District Election Officer under rule 92(2) of theConduct of Elections Rules, 1961 and under rule 93(1) of the said Rulesthe packets of counterfoils of used ballot papers and the packets of themarked copy of the electoral roll along with the packets of used andunused ballot paper etc. cannot be opened or inspected by any person orauthority except under the order of a competent court.

From what has been stated above it will appear that the secrecy ofvoting is maintained much more effectively under the new system thanunder the old one. Even if a competent court permits any person toinspect the counterfoils of ballot papers and marked copy of the electoralroll as well as the used ballot papers as referred to in rule 93(1) of theConduct of Elections Rules, 1961, even then by mere inspection of thesedocuments it is simply impossible to find out which voter has voted forwhich candidate. This can be found out only if the court directs notonly a recount of the votes under its own supervision but also that eachballot paper shall be related to its corresponding counterfoil. This will bea very difficult job and a time consuming one because unless the counter-foils, the ballot papers and the marked copy of the electoral roll are allcompared together, the identity of voters cannot be established. This willappear to be not an easy task if we bear in mind that in a parliamentaryelection the number of ballot papers and counterfoils will run into lakhsand in an assembly election the ballot papers and counterfoils will runinto 40/50/60/70/80 thousands if not more.

It will thus be seen that the violation of the secrecy of voting is almosta practical impossibility under the new system. On the contrary, the newsystem of ballot paper with counterfoils has made secrecy of the ballotalmost foolproof.

*A suggestion has been received that the voter must be asked to sign

on the register (that is, in the electoral roll) against his number and noton the counterfoil. But it has several practical difficulties. The namesof the electors are printed in the electoral roll in close space at the rateof about 80 to 120 names per page. There would not be sufficient spaceagainst each elector for taking his signature or thumb impression. Againmore than 70 per cent of the electors give their thumb impression and nottheir signature on account of illiteracy. The space available in the electoralroll will not be at all sufficient for taking the thumb impression of the largemajority of the electors. Again it makes no difference whether the signatureor the thumb impression of the elector is taken on the marked copy of theelectoral roll or the counterfoil of the ballot paper, because from the signatureor thumb impression alone, it would not be easy to identify the elector.As I have already stated, the counterfoils of the ballot paper containingthe signatures or thumb impressions of the electors are kept in a separatesealed packet which cannot be opened or inspected except by an order ofa competent court and so in actual practice, it would not be possible atall to violate the secrecy of the ballot.

206 INNOVATIONS ANp IMPROVEMENTS

(8) Revision of electoral rolls in accordance with the system ofelectoral cards :

This innovation was also introduced after the Fifth General Electionto the Lok Sabha in 1971. At the time of the Fifth General Election tothe Lok Sabha in 1971, complaints were received from a number of placesabout defects in the electoral rolls. On inquiry, a good number of thesecomplaints were no doubt found to be baseless but it could not be gainsaidthat many of the complaints were made with justification. In other words,in a good number of cases, there were defects in the electoral rolls, that isto say, either the names of wrong persons or dead persons remained insome cases on the electoral rolls or the names of eligible persons did notfind any place in the electoral rolls. In a huge country like India with apopulation of 550 millions and an electorate of nearabout 300 millions,defects and errors in electoral rolls cannot be altogether eliminated specially,when the electors themselves hardly cooperate with the enumeration staffwhen they make house to house visits for preparaing electoral rolls, popu-larly known as voters' lists. To reduce these defects and shortcomings inthe electoral rolls, this new system of revision was introduced shortly afterthe conclusion of the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha in March,1971. With the senior officers of the Commission, I visited a numberof States. I went into far-flung rural areas to see how the system wasworking. The system in a nut-shell is this : Books containing electoral cardsare required to be printed and these books are given to the enumeratorswhen they go to the electoral area to enumerate and record the names ofpersons who are to be included in the electoral roll and to delete andexclude the names of persons who are dead or who have ceased to beordinary resident or have become otherwise disqualified or not entitled forbeing retained in the electoral rolls. The enumerator is required to ascer-tain from the head of the family or any other senior member thereof thenames of all eligible persons who should be included in the electoral rolland also to delete the names of those whose names should be deletedtherefrom. After recording the names of the eligible persons in the familyon the electoral card thus prepared in duplicate, the head of the householdor a senior member thereof is required to sign a declaration on the electoralcard itself that the names as contained in the electoral card have been cor-rectly recorded and that no name of any eligible person has been excluded.This card is thereafter signed by the enumerator also. After this has beendone, one copy of the electoral card is handed over to the head or seniormember of the house-hold for preservation. The introduction of this methodhad the effect of improving the condition of our electoral rolls to a remark-able degree and in the urban and rural areas, specially in the rural areasthroughout the country, I was simply surprised to find how with great carethese electoral cards were kept. This shows the enthusiasm of our electo-rate in the matter of elections. That in its turn shows how politicallymature and conscious our electorate has become. This is a system whichis perhaps unique in the whole world.

CHAPTER XIII

UNREASON IN ELECTION POLITICS

"Good name in man—and woman—dear My lord,Is the immediate jewel of their souls.Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;But he that filches from me my good nameRobs me of that which not enriches himAnd makes me poor indeed."

—lago to Othello in Shakes-peare's Othello Act IH,Scene III.

2. "A wise and brave people will neither be cozened, nor bullied outof their liberty; but a wise and brave people may cease to be such; theymay degenerate; they may sink into sloth and luxury; they may resignthemselves to a treacherous conduct; or abet the enemies of the consti-tution, under a notion of supporting the friends of the government; theymay want the sense to discern their danger in time, or the courage toresist, when it stares them in the face

In the days of Tarquin the people of Rome were not yetcorrupted. In the days of Caesar they were most corrupt. A free peoplemay be sometimes betrayed; but no people will betray themselves, andsacrifice their liberty, unless they fall into a state of universal corruption;and when they are once fallen into such a state, they will be sure to losewhat they deserve no longer to enjoy".

—The Works of Lord Boling-broke, Volume II, page 107.

3. "There is always a risk of change of attitude particularly if theelection goes against a particular party".

—Per Hidayatullah J. in OmPrabha Jain's case [AIR1968 SC 1083].

4. "It I win, the election is free and fair; if I loose, it is corrupt andrigged."

—A well known politician ofa State belonging to anOpposition Party during hisconversation with the ChiefElection Commissioner.

207

208 UNREASON IN ELECTION POLITICS

The title of this chapter has been chosen on the pattern of the titleof a recent book "The Politics of Unreason, Right-Wing Extremism inAmerica 1790—1970" by two well known American authors, SeymourMartin Lipset and Earl Raab. In this book the authors have dealt withand examined a number of movements which have a tendency to influenceand find support of the lower class electoral base in America, but whichwere based upon no reason and good sense but only upon unreason. Inour recent elections, there has been ample evidence of a number of politicalactivities which if analysed properly would be found to be based uponunreason. Some of them are (1) allegations regarding 'rigging' in elections,(2) allegations as to chemical treatment of ballot papers, (3) allegationsas to rigging by organised violence and intimidation and (4) allegations ofmalafides in the introduction of the new procedure of counting. It isproposed to deal with them in seriatim.

A. Rigging in Elections :

From facts and statistics and decisions of the courts in so far as sucndecisions are available, we have already tried to show that individualcorrupt practices are steadily on the decline in our elections. Even thecritics of our elections realize this. But even realizing this, they cannotaccept the hard position that elections in India, a comparatively new demo-cracy, can be free and fair while elections in several other countries, includ-ing some old democracies, are not yet free from unfair means and corruptpractices. Therefore, for some time past we have been hearing quite oftenabout what is called in the press and in political circles 'rigging'.

The term 'rigging' is nowhere to be found in our election law. It isnot one of the eight specified corrupt practices. It is not even a term of art,peculiar to elections. We have been hearing about it in relation to ourelections since after the 1969-Mid-Term General Elections in a numberof States in whispering tone in some areas. We heard of it even at the timeof the Presidential Election of August, 1969. Since the Great Schism inthe Congress in 1969 we have been hearing about it after every electionin a sonorous voice. Constant repetition has the great quality of impartinga semblance of truth even to an absurd and fantastic falsehood. To putit m )re correctly, the gullible and credulous public start believing it tobe true. This is the notorious Goebbles method practised in Germany ona huge scale during the Nazi regime. Good things people will not gene-rally believe but bad things they will believe instantly and without anyquestion. If however, you ask them what do they mean by 'rigging', whatis the modus operandi in the practice of rigging, does rigging have onlyone form or is it like a chameleon that it may change its colour accord-ing to time and circumstances, I am sure very few will be able to answerthese simple questions even among the educated and sophisticated sectionsof the community. Then, if you ask those who are vociferous about it asto whether they have any direct knowledge or experience about riggingat elections, I am sure very few of them, if they have any respect for truth,will be able to say anything from personal knowledge and experience.Almost everything is based upon hearsay evidence received from workers

UNREASON IN ELECTION POLITICS 209

of parties and candidates defeated at the polls and other interested per-sons. If you cross-examine any of them, he will fall flat before such cross-examination.

The dictionary meaning of 'rig' appropriate in this connection is 'tomanage or manipulate in some underhand or fraudulent manner', 'tomanipulate unscrupulously'. As pointed out already, this is a generalexpression and not a term of art.

But one thing is clear.. When people speak about rigging in anelection, I think they try to convey the idea that a corrupt practice hasbeen committed at the election in a constituency or in a number of consti-tuencies on a large scale in an organised manner with the active help orconsent or connivance of the party in power acting either singly or actingin collusion with the election machinery, including the Election Commission.In other words, the manner in which the expression is used clearly suggeststhat rigging means unscrupulous and underhand or fraudulent managementand manipulation of elections by resort to corrupt practices or by the adop-tion of any unfair means in an organised manner by the governmentalmachinery or by the election machinery, or by both acting jointly. Wemay now examine in some detail some allegations regarding rigging inelections.

B. Chemical treatment of ballot papers :

The allegation made several days after the declaration of the resultsin the 1971—Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha of chemical treatmentof ballot papers and marking the same in a mechanical way with a magicinvisible ink is a glaring instance of an allegation of 'rigging' of elections.A number of election petitions making this bogus allegation was filed inthe various High Courts, such as the Delhi High Court, the Mysore HighCourt, the Bombay High Court, the Allahabad High Court etc. All theseallegations have been turned down not only in the High Courts but evenby the Supreme Court of India and costs have been awarded in each case tothe Election Commission. It is not necessary to refer to these judgmentsof the High Courts and the Supreme Court, but it is necessary to pointout the absurdity and the mischievousness of the allegation. Those whomade this mischievous allegation several days after the declaration of theresults wanted perhaps to wreck the Constitution of India and to bringabout a political chaos in the whole country and thereby to bring to anend democracy itself in this land. It was openly stated that the entireconstitution of the House of the People would be proved to be unconstitu-tional. One shudders to think about the nefarious designs of the personswho conceived this. They have no love for the country or for the welfare orgood of the people of this country. To serve their own interests they didnot hesitate to bring about chaos, confusion and revolution in this country.After the conclusion of the Fifth General Election, a sense of generalsatisfaction prevailed in the entire Election Commission and the electionmachinery throughout the country because according to all available infor-mation, the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha was held in the bestever possible manner without any hitch or disturbance. But then in its


issue of 20th March, 1971, the weekly 'Blitz' of Bombay published a warn-ing about such a nefarious design which was being hatched. The Blitzeven gave the modus operandi of this mischievous design. The warninggiven by the Blitz came to be true and practically close upon the heels ofthe Blitz publication, the allegations about chemical treatment of ballotpapers started with full force and gusto. Many politicians and pseudo-politicians belonging to several political parties openly, secretly or tacitlysupported this allegation. This was clear from the political complexionand affiliation of the persons who filed election petitions with this allegationin the various High Courts as well as from the evidence which came outin some of the cases. Those days were the darkest days in the electionhistory of India. But as 'Sruti' says—"Truth prevails and not falsehood".Therefore, this fantastic, mischievous and absurd allegation has met itsproper fate at the hands of the supreme tribunals of the land, marking atthe same time those serf-styled politicians as the biggest enemies of thenation. It is not necessary to dilate this aspect of the matter here. Thewhole country will judge these people on the basis of the Judgment ofthe Supreme Court and the High Courts. But the absurdity of the wholesituation which has not fully been brought even in the judgments of theCourts may briefly be recounted here. The story, as already noted, gainedcurrency in certain political quarters several days after the declaration ofthe results that a certain percentage of ballot papers in 200 (according toanother version 250) selected parliamentary constituencies were chemicallytreated and used in the polling stations in those constituencies. The 'Calf& Cow' symbol, it was alleged, on such chemically treated ballot paperswas stamped with invisible ink which became visible after about 72 hoursbecause of some chemical action. It was further alleged that some otherchemical application made the chemicalised ink evaporate in the case ofstamp affixed on such ballots after a fixed period (N.B.—The meaning ofthis sentence is not at all clear but I am putting it in the same words inwhich I have found it) and that the different pattern of results in WestBengal and Aligarh, where counting was done immediately after pollinglent support to this theory. The further allegation was that by a mechanicalprocess the voting mark with the invisible ink was put on the 'Calf and Cow'at exactly the same place.

It was also alleged that the fraud could have been easily detected andproved if the counting had been done according to the polling stations ashad been the practice in the past four general elections in the country.The change in the counting pattern after the nomination period had begun,was part of the conspiracy to cheat the Indian electorate and befool theworld.

The above, in a nut shell, was the substance of the allegations made.

To show how absurd and fantastic the story was, it is necessary to doa bit of analysis of some of the important steps in the election procedureand explain some of the practices followed in the elections. The ElectionCommission at first thought that it should remain silent about such wildand fantastic stories but letters and communications started coming to theCommission in which, while congratulating the Election Commission andthe election machinery throughout the country on the great task performed,


it was strongly urged upon the Commission that "any lie, even when blatanton the surface, gains momentum if oft repeated without any exposure bythose in authority and gains the colour of truth in course of time". Thesewere the words mentioned in a letter which was received from the CivilLiberties Council of a premier State in the South, namely Tamil Nadu.

It is to be particularly noticed that all these allegations and canardswere made only after the declaration of the results of the elections whenthe clear picture of the party positions emerged. No objection as to chemi-cally treated ballot papers or the use of invisible ink etc. was made byanybody either openly or whisperingly in any part of India before thedeclaration of the results. The absurdity of the whole thing was inherentin the allegation itself and will be apparent from the details of the allega-tions and the facts and circumstances to be presently mentioned. It wasalleged that the poll was rigged in respect of 200 (or 250) selected parlia-mentary constituencies. This involved at least 120 millions of electorsand an election machinery consisting of returning officers, assistant return-ing officers, presiding officers and polling officers numbering at least 5/6lakhs. In addition, there were thousands and thousands of police personneland sector magistrates on duty guarding polling stations.

It was not clearly mentioned anywhere whether the so-called chemicallytreated ballot papers were ballot papers different from the ballot papersprinted under the direct supervision of the State Chief Electoral Officer andhis staff, such as the returning officers etc., under strictest security guardin the Government Press, or whether the ballot papers printed as aforesaidin the Government Presses in the course of or after their printing had beenchemically treated. Nor was it spelt out clearly by whom and in whichplace they had been chemically treated. The following facts and circum-stances will reveal the absurdity of the allegation,—

(1) The paper required for printing the ballot papers came directlyfrom the various big paper mills in the country, such as the Orient PaperMills at Brajrajnagar in Orissa and Amlai in Madhya Pradesh (with theirhead office in the building of the United Commercial Bank Ltd., ParliamentStreet, New Delhi); the Ballarpur Paper Mills in Andhra Pradesh (headoffice at No. 124, Janpath, Thapar House, New Delhi); the Bengal PaperMills, Calcutta (head office at 14, Netaji Subhash Road, Calcutta-1); theMysore Paper Mills, Bhadravati in Mysore, and the Titagarh Paper Mills,Calcutta (head office in Chartered Bank Building, Calcutta-1).

(2) If the paper was treated chemically in the mills themselves, thenwho supplied the chemicals for the huge quantities of paper required forprinting the ballot papers. There is no indication as to the source fromwhere the chemicals were received. Were all the paper mills mentionedabove involved in the process ? Then, what was the modus operandi inthe chemical treatment of the paper ? Was not any scientific and trainedpersonnel required for that ? Who allowed them within the precincts of thepaper mills ? From where they were drafted ? What is the nature of thechemical with which the paper was treated and at what stage of the manu-facture of the paper ? If the paper was chemically treated after it hadbeen manufactured, then with whose permission was this done and did itnot require any laboratory ? Is there any such laboratory within the


precincts of the paper mills themselves ? Did the colour of the papeichange after such chemical treatment ? These and many other questionswill crop up if the theory is accepted that the paper for printing the ballotpapers was treated within the paper mills themselves. We should notforget in this connection that every paper mill in the country has, as everyworkshop and factory in the country has, now strong workers' unions.Was it possible that such a colossal conspiracy to manipulate elections inthis nefarious manner should escape the notice of the hundreds and thou-sands of workers of the paper mills, especially when the workers are nowextremely vigilant about the activities of the management ? Or was it thatthe managements and the workers and employees in all these big papermills of the country joined together with the originators and perpetrators ofthis evil design for implementing the same in order to give a thumpingvictory to one of the parties at the poll ? It may be pointed out that manyof the workers' unions do not owe allegiance to one and the same party.

(3) If not in the mills themselves, then were the papers chemicallytreated in the Government Presses ? Are the Government Presses equippedwith laboratories in which chemicals for treating the papers are availablein the required quantity and at very short notice ? The time available forprinting the ballot papers in the Government Presses was extremely short.Firm orders for the printing of ballot papers could be given by the ChiefElectoral Officers concerned only after the lists of contesting candidateswith the respective symbols allotted to them had been prepared after 3 P.M.on the last date fixed for withdrawal of candidatures by the various return-ing officers in the State. Thereafter, the Chief Electoral Officer had tocheck carefully the lists of contesting candidates from all the parliamen-tary constituencies within the State concerned and then only firm ordersfor the printing of ballot paper could be given with the names of the con-testing candidates and their respective symbols etc. Therefore, only afew days were available in the Press for the printing of the ballot papersbefore the date of the poll, in numbers running into lakhs and lakhs.

(4) After the ballot papers were printed, they were sent under strongarmed guard to the respective District Election Officers and there the ballotpapers before being despatched to the polling stations were kept in thetreasuries or sub-treasuries under strong guard and double lock.

(5) If the theory was that the papers were chemically treated in theGovernment Presses, then the question would arise, at what stage—beforethe printing of the ballot papers or after the ballot papers had been printedbut before they were packed in bundles ? It was alleged that certain per-centage of the ballot papers were chemically treated. What was the exactpercentage ? Had the chemical treatment of lakhs and millions of ballotpapers been done one after the other or had been done in bundles ? If so",were the bundles loose or tight ? Were they big or small ? Were scientificand trained personnel readily available in the Presses ? In the Government•Presses there are strong employees' unions owing allegiance to differentpolitical parties. Could it have been kept secret from their knowledge ?Or were all of them, in hundreds and thousands, bribed by offer of illegalgratification ? These and so many other questions would crop up naturallyin this connection.


(6) In the next place, if it was not done in the Press, was this chemicaltreatment done in the treasuries or the sub-treasuries where the ballotpapers were kept for a day or two before being sent to the various pollingstations through the returning officers ? The District Election Officer whois generally the District Magistrate himself is a senior officer of the StateGovernment. Without his active co-operation, this sort of thing would nothave been at all possible. Questions similar to those raised above wouldcrop up here also.

(7) In this connection, we should not forget that there were a numberof States and Union territories where the party in power was not the partyin power at the Centre. And in these States, namely Bihar, Uttar Pradesh,Mysore and Punjab, and in the Union territory of Delhi, the party in power inthe Centre, that is to say, the Congress (then presided over by Shri JagjivanRam) swept the poll. Even in Gujarat where the party in power at theCentre was not the party in power, the seats were divided in equal num-bers between the two rival groups of the undivided Congress, whereas, it ispertinent to mention here that the performance of the Congress (then pre-sided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram) was not as good in Madhya Pradeshand Rajasthan and also, to some extent, in Andhra Pradesh, where theparty in power at the Centre was in power. Thus, in Bihar, where anSVD Government was in power, out of 53 seats, the Congress then pre-sided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram got 39 seats, in Uttar Pradesh, wherealso an SVD Government was in power, out of 85 seats the Congress thenpresided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram got 73, in Mysore, where the Gov-ernment was led by Congress presided over by Shri Nijalingappa, all the27 seats went to the Congress presided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram. InPunjab, where Akali Dal was in power, out of 13 seats, 10 went to theCongress then presided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram. In Delhi where theJan Sangh was in power, all the 7 seats were bagged by the Congress thenpresided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram. But in Rajasthan, the Congress thenpresided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram got 14 seats out of 23 and in MadhyaPradesh 21 out of 37 seats.

(8) But mere chemical treatment will not do according to the story.Invisible ink also will have to be used, that is to say, on those chemicallytreated ballot papers the voting marks on the symbol 'Calf & Cow' wouldbe given according to the story, in invisible ink at the identical place andwhen the ballot paper with this invisible ink mark was given to the voter,then if the voter put his mark on the symbol 'Calf & Cow' or any othersymbol, then, after 72 hours, according to the theory, the mark put bythe voters will automatically become invisible and mark put on the ballotpaper with invisible ink beforehand would appear and become visible.The question naturally arises, at which place and by whom and at whatpoint of time the mark on the symbol 'Calf & Cow' was put on the ballotpapers? Could this prior marking on the ballot papers with invisible inkbe done in the polling station where the agents of all the candidates werepresent? Then the appearance of the invisible marks or the dis-appearanceof the visible marks could not take place simultaneously, because theinvisible ink mark must have been put earlier, whereas the visible mark hadbeen put by the voter on the date of poll during the polling period startingfrom 7.30 or 8 in the morning and ending at 4.30 or 5 in the evening.Then, as the polling was spread and staggered throughout the country

3EC/72—15


over a number of days (from the 1st to the 10th March, 1971) the placingof the invisible marks on the ballot papers must necessarily have had to bespread and staggered in a systematic and calculated way in respect of at leastli lakhs polling stations. By which agency and from what place or placesthis was done? From where the instruments for marking theinvisible mark in large numbers were made available and to whom ?To get over this difficulty, recourse was had to the second fantastic theorythat the invisible mark was put by some mechanical process on the symbol'Calf & Cow' and because it was done by a mechanical process it was placedon every ballot paper at the identical place. But then the same questionwould arise. In view of the staggering of the poll, would it have beendone on the same day? If on different days and from different places,what are the details thereof? And if only on a certainpercentage of the ballot papers this practice was resorted to, then was itmore or less the same percentage in all the 200 or 250 constituenciesbecause the difference of votes between the elected candidates and thenext candidate even in the so-called selected constituencies has not beenuniform ? For example, in the South Delhi parliamentary constituency,assuming it to be one of the selected constituencies where Shri BalrajMadhok contested and who first made this charge of .use of chemicals andinvisible ink in the elections, the votes polled in favour of the variouscandidates were as follows :

(1) Inder Sen(2) Kali Ram;3) Khushinder Singh Bains[4) Ghansham Sharma Shastri . . . .[5) G.V. Satyanarayana[6) Ram Mohan Dubey . . . .(7) Balraj Madhok(8) Shashi Bhushan(9) Soam Datt Joshi

. . 545. . . . 886

325411

1,273766

96,8161,68 406

533

For all practical purposes, it might be regarded as a straight contest. Thevotes polled by Shri Balraj Madhok was not a negligible number. Accord-ing to the theory, the valid ballot papers mentioned above of all the candi-dates other than Shri Shashi Bhushan must not have been chemicallytreated and marked with invisible ink stamp and that means that the per-petrators of the act including the lakhs and lakhs of presiding and pollingofficers must have been endowed with some prescience or with Divya-Chakshu (enlightened vision) so that they could easily distinguish betweenthe two types of ballot papers. India has been since at least the time ofthe Atharva Veda been known for indrajal (black magic) and thereforethis might have actually happened !

It was alleged that the machine-like stamping of the symbol 'Calf &Cow' created doubts in his mind. If so, why no objection was taken atthe time of counting itself ? From his statement it appeared that as a matterof fact Shri Balraj Madhok was present at the time of counting and accord-ing to newspapers reports he was reported to have said at the time ofleaving the counting place that he conceded defeat to Mrs. Gandhi and notto Shri Shashi Bhushan.

(9) If, however, the story was that the chemically treated ballot paperswere printed in and imported from Soviet Russia, then the question wouldarise when the lists of contesting candidates of these 200 or 250 selectedparliamentary constituencies were sent to the Soviet Union. Were they


sent through the Soviet Embassy in New Delhi? How were they all broughtfrom different parts of India to the Soviet Embassy in Delhi ? The listswere prepared by the returning officers who are pretty senior officers ofthe State Governments and then before print orders are placed, all thelists of contesting candidates were checked, as pointed out already, by theChief Electoral Officer concerned. Were the lists obtained in a surreptitiousmanner from 200 or 250 returning officers or in bulk from the Chief ElectoralOfficers, each of whom is a very very senior officer of the State Governmentof the rank of Secretary, if not of a stut higher status ? Were all thereturning officers of these constituencies or the Chief Electoral Officersconcerned in conspiracy and league with one another and sent the lists tothe Soviet Union through the Air India International or some foreign air-lines ? When were arrangements with these airlines made ? In SovietUnion were the lists delivered first to the Indian Embassy in Moscow ?If not, to which agency of the Soviet Union ? Were the facilities forprinting the ballot papers in different regional languages available in SovietUnion? Could crores of ballot papers with different symbols be printed inshort time in that country ? Where were the invisible ink marks put on thechemicalised ballot papers in the Soviet Union or India ?

Was it not a very serious allegation against a foreign government thatthat government with a view to rigging the elections of such a big countrylike India agreed to have the ballot papers printed in the presses of its owncountry ? And would it not be in flagrant violation of the well establishedrelations between two foreign countries ? Would any responsible govern-ment agree to these things ?

These questions and many other questions would have cropped up inthis connection.

Then it should not be forgotten that the last dates for withdrawal ofcandidatures were different in different States. The time gap, was about sevendays according to the difference in the dates for the issue of the writ notifi-cations.

Then again, after the ballot papers had been printed in Soviet Unionand chemically treated, were they sent to some centralised place? If so,where is that place ? And who is the person or authority to whom theywere sent ? And how did that person or authority distribute them to the200 or 250 returning officers of the 200 or 250 selected parliamentary con-stituencies which must have been spread over the length and breadth ofthe country ? In the allegation, nothing is specific as to the location ofthese selected 200 or 250 parliamentary constituencies in the country noris anything stated at all as to the basis on which or the person or personsby whom these 200/250 parliamentary constituencies were selected. Orwere only a percentage of the ballot papers for these constituencies printedin Soviet Union, that is to say, only those ballot papers which were chemi-cally treated ? And were the rest printed in India ? It should not beforgotten in this connection that the internal air flights in the country hadbeen quite irregular for some time at that time and during the period of thepoll they were very irregular. This is common knowledge. How couldthe ballot papers in that event be distributed to about 200 or 250 consti-tuencies and to about 1,80,000 polling stations.


After a number of experts—scientists examined in some of the electioncases by the petitioners failed miserably and collapsed before searching cross-examination in the High Courts, the emphasis started being shifted on thecanard that the ballot papers were printed in the Soviet Union.

From what has been stated above, it would appear that the storywas not only fantastic and absurd but it was the figment of fiction of abrain which must have gone wild.

It should not be forgotten that in such a vast country with 550 millionsof population, such operation would not be kept a secret, specially, as wehave shown already, lakhs of persons would have to be involved in it andwhen governments with different complexions were in power in a goodnumber of the States and Union territories. We have seen from our experi-ence that even the top most secret decisions taken in the Union Cabinetsee the light of the day in the course of a few hours. And such a country-wide gigantic operation was kept secret for days and days together andeverybody became aware of it only several days after the results of theelections were declared in all the parliamentary constituencies throughoutthe country. Perhaps even a precocious child would not be inclined tobelieve this cock and bull story. But alas ! self-seeking knows no boundsof absurdity.

(10) Then, if the visible marks which were put by the voters on the dayof poll on the ballot papers became invisible in the course of 72 hours,did the full signatures of the presiding officers on the back of the ballotpapers recorded in pursuance of rule 38(1) of the Conduct of ElectionsRules, 1961, also become invisible? If they had not, what was the ex-

. planation ? Were those signatures immune to chemical treatment ?

What has been stated above as to the signatures, will apply withgreater force to the distinguishing marks which were required to be putupon the back of every ballot paper before issue to the voter by thepresiding officer of the polling station concerned under rule 38 aforesaid.If may be mentioned here that the distinguishing mark on the ballot paperwas put with the same ink which was used by the voter for marking thevote because the stamp pads in both cases were of ink of the same qua-lity. If the marks put by the voters became invisible, did the distinguish-ing marks also become so invisible ?

Then attempt was made to make out a strong case by saying that theperformance of the Congress (then presided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram)was not good in Bengal because there the counting started immediatelyafter the date of the poll. If that be so, then what about Kerala ? InKerala, the poll concluded on the 9th March and the counting started thenext day. i.e. on the 10th March, 1971, and the result of the Lok Sabhaelection in Kerala, as in the 1970-September General Election to theAssembly, had been remarkable so far as the United Front and the Cong-ress (then presided over by Shri Jagjivan Ram) were concerned.

(11) If, however, the story that the chemically treated ballot paperswere put into the ballot boxes only after the poll was over, the theory wouldbecome still more fantastic. That would mean that the ballot boxes usedat more than \\ lakhs polling stations in 200/250 parliamentary consti-tuencies throughout the country must have been opened by. breaking their


numbered paper seals and all other seals and after cutting the sealed clothor gunny bags, in which these ballot boxes were placed, and thereafter allthe genuine ballot papers used at the time of the poll running into severalmillions were taken out of the ballot boxes and the chemically treatedballot papers, again running into several millions, inserted in their placeand stead into those ballot boxes and these were sealed with the paperseal and other seals with the signatures of the candidates or their pollingagents and again replaced in cloth or gunny bags to give these papers ashow of genuineness. It may be mentioned that the paper seals are print-ed at the Nasik Security Press and are numbered and the name of the Elec-tion Commission micro-printed on each paper seal just like bank cheque andthat no ballot box after it has been closed and sealed can be opened withoutbreaking the paper seal. A regular account of the paper seals distributedamong the presiding officers is kept by the returning officer of the consti-tuency. The same paper seal could not have been used because it had beenbroken in the process of opening the ballot box for committing the mischief.The existence of a paper seal with a different number would have at onceraised doubts at the time of counting. No doubt whatsoever was howevermentioned at the time of counting in any of the 200/250 parliamentaryconstituencies. Then, these chemically treated ballot papers must have ontheir back the signatures of the presiding officer who presided over these1J lakhs polling stations throughout the country and also must haveborne the distinguishing marks of their respective polling stations. Howwas it possible to obtain the signatures of many lakhs of presiding officerswho after doing their special job as presiding officers must have gone backto their regular jobs and services? Were they all bribed? From where thelakhs of distinguishing marks for stamping each and every ballot paperagain obtained? The presiding officers returned the stamps for making thesemarks and all other election materials to the respective returning officers.It has already been mentioned that all the ballot boxes are kept underthe safest possible custody before the start of the actual counting. Didnot the signatures and the distinguishing marks by whomsoever they mighthave been put on the back of the ballot papers, become invisible underthe influence of this chemical treatment ? Not even a fool or an idiot canbelieve such an absurd, fantastic and wild canard.

Brazen-faced attempts were made to show that the whole mischief wasperpetrated in the Election Commission in New Delhi in conspiracy withthe Prime Minister and a number of senior Central Ministers such asShri Jagjivan Ram and Shri Uma Shankar Dikshit and for that purposeail the ballot papers were brought to Delhi before the poll. In an earlierchapter it has already been shown that neither the paper for printing theballot papers nor the printed ballot papers themselves are at any stagebrought to the Election Commission. Requisitions for the necessary quan-tity of paper which may be required for ballot papers at an election aresent by the Chief Electoral Officer direct to the Director General of Supp-lies and Disposals and then the paper mills at the instance of the DirectorGeneral of Supplies and Disposals sent the requisite paper to the StateGovernment Press concerned under the care of the Chief Electoral Offi-cer under whose direct supervision the printing is done. In the case ofthe Union territories the requisition is made for obvious reasons to theDirector General of Supplies and Disposals by the Election Commissionand then the remaining stages are exactly the same as in the States. Thus


it was a downright falsehood and blatant lie to say, suggest or insinuatethat the paper for printing the ballot papers or the ballot papers werebrought to the Election Commission for committing the mischief.

Above I have mentioned only a few important aspects and featuresrelating to ballot papers, their printing and distribution, the time availablefor such printing and distribution, the difference in ballot papers of differentconstituencies because of difference in names and numbers of candidates,and symbols allotted to them, the direct responsibility of the Chief Elec-toral Officers and the officers working under them such as the district elec-tion officers and the returning officers at every stage in relation to ballotpapers, and millions of people involved in the whole process, to show theutter absurdity of the foolish and mischievous allegation. It is needless atthis stage to enter into a detailed discussion of the matter as the judgmentsof the High Courts and Supreme Court have laid bare the hollowness ofthe charge. It has now found its right and proper place in the dust bin ofhistory.

C. Rigging by violence and intimidation :

In the 1972-Fifth General Election to the Legislative Assemblies,allegation of rigging first came from West Bengal. This time the allega-tion took the form of coercion, threat or violence by organised gangs ofgoondas set by ruling party in a pre-planned manner at polling stationswith the help of the polling personnel and thereby scaring away genuinevoters and then marking the ballot papers by those goondas with the helpof polling staff. In fairness to each of the political parties in West Bengal,it must be said that none of them indulged in 1971 in the absurd story ofchemical treatment of ballot papers and use of invisible ink thereon, northen, or in the Assembly elections of 1972 did any of them impute anyevil motives or designs to the Election Commission. It must also be saidin fairness to those who made allegation of rigging by organised intimida-tion and violence, that the allegation of such rigging is not that sinister,dangerous, absurd or mischievous as the allegation of rigging the electionsby chemical treatment of ballot papers and the use of invisible ink inmarking the ballot papers etc. But even then, the allegation was confinedat first to about 18 assembly constituencies. The number was raised to34 and 39, ultimately it went up to 200. It was alleged that rigging atthe instance of the ruling party at the Centre was committed in the shapeof intimidation, coercion and violence. But no election petition was filedbecause those who made this allegation regarded the entire election as afraud and therefore as no election at all. But under the Constitution thereis no other way to challenge an election which has once been held andin which the result has been declared. Because of the introduction ofballot papers with counterfoils, the voters without exception coming tothe polling stations to cast their votes were required to put their signaturesor thumb impressions on the counterfoils and it would have been quiteeasy for the High Court to find out whether the allegations were true toany substantial extent so as to materially affect the result of the election.A few election petitions, even two, three or four, would have proved ordisproved the truth or otherwise of the allegations and it would not atall have been difficult to locate with the help of the marked copy of theelectoral roll the voters whose signatures or thumb impressions appeared


or purported to appear on the counterfoils. But that has not been done. Itwas noticed in the press that there was a talk of a non-official inquirybody or panel being appointed to go into the matter but such non-officialinquiry body or panel would have no status under the law or the Consti-tution. On the contrary, it would seem that any such step would havebeen unconstitutional in view of the clear language of article 329 (b) ofthe Constitution and, mind you that article starts with the non obstanteclause 'Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution'. With this nonobstante clause, article 329(b) reads as follows :—

'Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, no election to eitherHouse of Parliament or to the House or either House of theLegislature of a State shall be called in question except by anelection petition presented to such authority and in suchmanner as may be provided for by or under any law madeby the appropriate Legislature.'

"Such authority" referred to in the above provision is now the HighCourt. Therefore, even no writ petition or no other proceeding can befifcd or started before any court or tribunal in the country by a defeatedcandidate or by any other person challenging an election whether as afraud or whether as illegal or unconstitutional except by means of anelection petition presented before the High Court under the provisions ofthe Representation of the People Act, 1951. Then, it has been stated insome quarters that this objection to the appointment of any non-officialinquiry body or panel is a technical one. I would differ. This is aprovision of the Constitution and election once held and completed is avery important matter, which should not be interfered with unless theallegations have been proved to the hilt as in a criminal case. If this isregarded as a technical objection, then even the provisions in the Consti-tution regarding fundamental rights can at convenience of persons con-cerned be termed as technical, but that would indeed be a dangerous andpreposterous proposition. Can we ever suggest that there should be non-official bodies for the trial of criminal cases involving offences, say underthe Indian Panel Code in accordance with procedure to be evolved by suchnon-official bodies, and not the criminal courts duly constituted under theCode of Criminal Procedure, for such trial in accordance with the provi-sions of that Code on the ground that the members of such non-officialbodies should evoke greater confidence ? This suggestion seems to befantastic because it suggests an extra legal procedure for dealing withmatters for which there are adequate provisions in law and the Constitu-tion.

In the next place, any non-official body or panel even if appointedwould have to rely almost entirely on oral evidence because importantelection documents, such as packets containing counterfoils of ballotpapers, used ballot papers, unused ballot papers, marked copy of theelectoral roll or any other important election papers mentioned in rule 93of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 would not be available for ins-pection to such body or panel because these election papers can be madeavailable for inspection only under the order of a competent court, i.e.,the High Court. And searching cross-examination of witnesses appearingbefore the non-official body or panel in an orderly manner as in a courtwould not have been possible. Most of the witnesses would be likely to


be biased. Further, such non-official inquiry after a lapse of so manymonths of the elections might have even created tense political situationby creating embittered feelings among the followers and supporters of thevarious political parties.

It may not be out of place to mention another point here. Therewas no allegation of rigging in West Bengal at the time of the Lok SabhaGeneral Election in March 1971, i.e., just one year before the Assemblyelections in March, 1972. The electorate, the polling staff, police per-sonnel etc., by and large, remained practically the same in both elections.It does not appear readily acceptable to common practical sense that inthe course of one year all of them in about 200 assembly constituenciesout of a total of 280 resorted to or acquiesced in rigging by coercion,intimidation and violence in the Assembly elections. There were reportsfrom returning officers about disturbances in only 10 polling stations inconstituencies near Calcutta and in a few other places and the Commissiontook immediate steps by passing necessary orders with respect thereto.Only four complaints were received in the Secretariat of the Commissionfrom four electors that they could not cast their votes either because theywere turned away from the polling stations or they left the polling stationsout of fear without casting their votes. Under these circumstances, it seemsdifficult to believe that election in West Bengal was rigged in about 200 outof the total 280 assembly constituencies. The possibility of the practice ofintimidation and violence in a number of polling stations in a few consti-tuencies round about Calcutta and its suburbs cannot be altogether ruledout because shortly before the poll I personally visited these constituenciesand found tension and strained feelings among the various political partiesand their workers and supporters in the suburban and outlying areas ofCalcutta.

Long after the elections were over, allegations started being madethat the election had been vitiated by rigging not only in West Bengal,but also in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir. With booth—capturing in Bihar and other places and repoll and fresh poll in variousStates I have already dealt.

I do not say that elections in this country have become absolutelyfree from corruption. But that they are freer and fairer than before—there is no doubt about it and hence the theory of rigging, i.e. commissionof corrupt practices in an organised fashion with the help or connivanceof the governmental machinery or the election machinery or both acting incollusion with each other ; but this theory, as amply shown in this Report,does not stand the test of close scrutiny.

D. Allegations of mala fides in the introduction of the new countingprocedure.

In the general elections held previously, the counting of the voteswas done polling station-wise, i.e. all the votes polled at a polling stationwere counted separately and the result of the voting in each polling areawas also .announced. This was in accordance with the old rule 56(7) ofthe Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961, which provided that "After thecounting of all ballot papers contained in all the ballot boxes used at a pollingstation has been completed, the returning officer shall make the entries


in a result sheet in Form 20 and announce the particulars." As a resultof this procedure, it was possible to know the number of votes cast foreach of the contesting candidates and the political parties, if any, whichthey represented, at each polling station. This materially affected thesecrecy of the vote inasmuch as if all the electors in a polling area or amajority of them had voted for a particular candidate representing a part-ticular party, it was easy to know not only the trend of voting in thatpolling area, but also more or less how each person had voted. It wasalleged that often on the basis of such information the people resid-ing in some of the polling areas were subjected to all sorts of harassmentafter the election. This also led to intimidation and victimisation of thevoters because if the trend was against the powerful local interest, thevoters were often intimidated from going to the polling station at all forvoting. It is regrettable to say that such nefarious practices were employedmostly against the Harijans and other weaker and poorer sections of thecommunity. A number of glaring instances came to my notice at thetime of the mid-term general elections in 1969 in Uttar Pradesh. But Ido not like to recount them here in great detail. Reference may brieflybe made to a few cases.

In the first place, when on the 5th February 1969 I, accompaniedby the Commissioner of Meerut Division, the district magistrate of Meerut,the senior superintendent of police of Meerut and Secretary, Shri A. N. Senof the Election Commission, visited in 405-Chaprauli Assembly constitu-ency polling stations nos. 82 and 83 in Dhikana Primary Pathshala invillage Dhikana situated in the interior at a fairly longdistance from the main road, I found a large number of young personssitting in the open spacious compound and other open areas in front of thepolling stations. Polling in the polling stations was outwardly quite peace-ful, the young persons in the open compound and areas hailed us with largeshouts : they offered us even milk of which I took a small quantity as Icould not avoid it. The presence of so many young persons sitting, loiter-ing and gossiping in the compound just in front of the polling stationcreated a suspicion in my mind that their object was not so innocent asit appeared to be. This was not exactly in consonance with law as con-tained in section 130 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 asthe presence of so many young persons loitering and gossiping very nearthe queue of the voters might naturally be interpreted that they werewatching whether any Harijan voter had the temerity to stand in thequeue within their view. I enquired from those young persons as well asthe presiding and polling officers of these two polling stations and thepolling agents as to the conditions prevailing there and all of them saidthat the conditions were peaceful and I could also see that the conditionswere actually peaceful. I could see also a" number of police personnelstanding near the polling stations. But one representative of the press(several such representatives were also touring with me) stated to me inEnglish that what was stated by those persons or even by the pollingstaff and the polling agents was not absolutely correct. (This ratherseemed a bit strange as the polling staff had been drafted from outside.It was also difficult to understand why all the polling agents should havesuppressed the truth.) He told me that some Harijan voters includingsome women had told him that out of fear they did not and could not go tothe polling stations to cast their votes. I at once with the Divisional

222 UNREASON IN ELBCTION POLITICS

Commissioner went a bit into the interior part of the village and found bythe road side a number of persons, urchins, children, a few adult malesand females. On my asking the males and females, they however did notmention to me anything about fear arising out of intimidation or coercionor any fear at all on their part. One woman in purdah told me somethingin rustic Hindi which meant that she would not like to go to the pollingstation out of her own accord. The press representative concerned wasnear me. When I told him about this, he retorted that perhaps out ofmodesty and shyness they were not divulging the real truth to me. Butone incident happened which definitely appeared to me rather unusual.Out of that big crowd of persons present near the polling stations, thoughthere were absolutely peaceful conditions, one aged man of about sixtyyears twice or thrice practically rushed to me through the crowd andvolunteered to say "saheb idhar to sab bilkul theek thak hai" ; — andhe was reported to be a Harijan. Even when I was getting into the jeep,he went to the length of pulling the tail of my coat to repeat the samething. This unusual behaviour on the part of this elderly Harijan votergave rise to a suspicion in my mind that perhaps "All is not well in theState of Denmark". I returned from Dhikana village and took my caron the main road.

In the second place, after 4 p.m. we reached village Shoran in 407-Khatauli Assembly constituency where, among others, polling stations nos.24 and 25 were situated side by side in the Shoran primary school build-ing. Through village narrow, muddy and dirty paths and bye-paths, withvery great difficulty we could go near the primary school in jeeps leavingour cars at a distance. As soon as we got down from our cars at a dis-tance, a lawyer who came from Muzaffarnagar, Shri Hatindar Mittal byname, started shouting before us at the top of his voice that the electionswere not free and fair as the Harijan voters were not being allowed tocast their votes. There was a number of police personnel present there.Immediately I asked the lawyer to take us to the Harijan locality and Iaccompanied by the Divisional Commissioner, the district magistrate, thesuperintendent of police and others went into the interior and asked theHarijans as to whether they had voted and, if not, whether they wouldthen like to vote. When those Harijan voters told us that they had notvoted and were ready and willing to cast their votes, I asked the lawyerto bring as many of them to the polling stations which were not far off,as would like to cast their votes. At that time it was about 5 O' clockand the polling hour was coming to a close. Still in exercise of inherentconstitutional power of the Commission I allowed those voters who wantedto vote to come to the polling stations situated side by side and in mypresence they formed big queues of at least 150 persons, and those of themwhose names were found in the electoral roll with the polling officers wereimmediately allowed to cast their votes. After making this arrangement,I came out in the compound of the primary school building and took thesector magistrate to task as to why he did not make arrangments for thesepeople to vote with the help of the Jarge number of police personnel presentthere. To this the sector magistrate replied that nobody — neither anycandidate nor any of the polling agents of any candidate—brought thisto his notice. It was already about 5.30, still the persons who stood inthe queue were voting one by one. I would have stopped there for longer


time, but one Shri Ajmal Khan made repeated and insistent requests thatI should visit village Barkata.

After this personal experience, the Commission was determined toput a stop to such undemocratic practices. And it first tried the experi-ment of mobile polling stations, but it proved quite costly. Then, it startedsetting up polling stations in larger numbers. And lastly, on the eve ofLok Sabha General Elections in 1971, it decided to introduce the new count-ing procedure on the receipt of letters and representations from the mem-bers of the public.

Under the revised system of counting, as notified by the Ministry ofLaw in S.O. No. 479, dated 27-1-1971, all the ballot papers con-tained in all the ballot boxes used at a polling station are counted initiallyto find out their total number. The number so ascertained is recordedin Part II of the Ballot Paper Account (Form 16) appended to the Con-duct of Elections Rules, 1961, Part I of which is filled in at the pollingstation itself by the presiding officer. After the total number of ballot paperscontained in the ballot boxes used at the polling stations in an assemblyconstituency are counted and recorded, the ballot papers are put inside areceptacle and mixed together. After mixing, the ballot papers are hand-ed over to the counting tables for being sorted candidatewise and counted.As a result of this procedure, the result of the voting will be known anddeclared only for a whole assembly constituency and not for each pollingarea.

In spite of the new procedure it is quite possible, if need be, toascertain the ballot papers used at any polling station because the ballotpapers used at a polling station are required by law before issue to anelector to be —

(a) stamped with the distinguishing mark which distinguishes theballot papers used at that polling station from the ballot pa-pers used at any other polling stations, and

(b) signed in full on its back by the presiding officer of thatparticular polling station.

[Vide rule 38(1) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961].

In addition, the serial numbers of the ballot papers issued by thereturning officer to a polling station under his jurisdiction are recorded byhim in a register maintained by him for the purpose. All these things,together with the initial counting just mentioned above, make it quitepossible to ascertain ballot papers used at a polling station even afterthe mixing of all the ballot papers although a little more time may betaken in this procedure.

The new procedure was introduced by short amendments in rule 55and rule 56 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. For sub-rule (1)of rule 55, two new-sub-rules—sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (1A)—weresubstituted. For sub-rule (1) of rule 56, a new sub-rule was substituted,and for sub-rule (7) of the same rule a new sub-rule was substituted.These amendments were notified, as pointed out already, by the Ministryof Law on the 27th January, 1971. The poll started on the 1st March,1971, and the counting started on the 10th March, 1971. Thus, there


was ample time to give wide publicity to this new procedure and rehearsalswere held under the supervision of senior officers of the Commission at thevarious State capitals throughout India relating to this new method ofcounting. But announcement of the new procedure was made in thesecond week of January, 1971.

It may be pointed out that ballot papers are rejected individually inaccordance with the detailed provisions contained in sub-rule (2) of rule56 of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. The various grounds arespecified in that sub-rule. Whether the counting is done polling station-wise or assembly constituencywise, has nothing to do with the rejection oracceptance of a ballot paper.

It has been stated in some quarters that the new method may leadto corruption and allegation was actually made that the new method wasintroduced to prevent the chemically treated ballot papers from beingdetected. That this allegation is absolutely bogus is clear from the posi-tion that with a little effort the ballot papers can be separated polling sta-tion-wise, if need be. But it surpasses one's imagination how this newmethod can encourage corruption. On the contrary, the new method wasintroduced to reduce to a large extent the corrupt practice of pre-electionintimidation and post-election victimisation of voters and to maintainsecrecy of voting. We should not forget that the secrecy of the ballot isone of the fundamental bases of representative democracy. The secrecyof the ballot is the most prominent feature of the election law in any truedemocracy. As Dimock and Dimock observed in their book 'AmericanGovernment in Action' at page 294 —

"The secret ballot, we now realise, is one of our basic liberties notto be given up without a struggle."

It is clear from the evidence which the famous French publicist Alexide Tocqueville gave before the Select Committee of the British House ofCommons on the 22nd June, 1835, that the first enactment in France'relative to secret voting is to be found in the law of 29th June, 1820.'The law said in express and positive terms 'that the vote is to be secret'.The law provided that 'the elector himself after writing his vote or havingcaused it to be written by an elector chosen by himself, shall deliver thepresident the paper folded and that immediately after theexamination of those papers they shall be burnt in the presence of theelectors.'

[Minutes of Evidence — pages 230-41]

Thus, the new procedure was introduced with these two objects,namley, to reduce the extent of the prevalence of the corrupt practice ofpre-election intimidation and post-election victimisation and to makesecrecy of voting more perfect than before the new amendment speciallyin relation to Harijans and persons belonging to weaker sections of thecommunity.

The idea for introducing this new system came also from some votersthemselves. The Commission received a number of letters in which votersthemselves suggested that the method of counting should be changed.


Thus, on the 8th of January, 1971, a citizen named Prem Nath wrote aletter to the Commission as follows :

New DelhiDt. 8-1-71

Sir,With growing violence and the tendency on the part of leaders and

political parties to hold communities to ransom, as happened recently ina constituency in Rajasthan, the secrecy of the ballot is getting eroded.This is all the more so, in urban constituencies where voters of particularcommunities are concentrated in particular areas. The present practice,therefore, of counting votes boothwise or boxwise needs reconsiderationand revision so as to preserve the secrecy of the 'voting pattern' as well,apart from the individual voter.

The Commission would be doing a great service to the communityat large if they could give this matter serious consideration in the contextof the ensuing mid-term poll.

With regards,Yours faithfully,

Sd|- Prem Nath.'

I need not refer to other letters.

After the announcement had been made about the introduction of thenew procedure, Shri J. M. Lobo Prabhu, ex-MP and an important mem-ber of the Swatantra Party, sent to the Chief Election Commissioner onthe 23rd January, 1971, a letter enclosing a copy of an article he wasgoing to publish in his paper 'Insight'. The relevant paragraph of thatarticle is reproduced below :

'The Election Commission is trying to check electoral offences butits proposals, referred to a Parliamentary Committee, will notapply to the present elections. The Election Commissionerhas however taken steps to increase the secrecy of votes bymixing ballot papers, not only before they are issued but alsowhile they are counted so that there is not the remotest possi-bility of the voter or the village being identified.'

Thereafter, the Commission received a letter dated 11th February,1971, from the President of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, Bombay. Theletter is reproduced below :—

"BHARATIYA JAN SANGH, BOMBAY.

11th February, 1971

The Election Commission of India,Talkatora Road,New Delhi-1.

Sir,

We refer you to your notification No. 3|4|71 dated 30th Jan.,1971, regarding the new procedure of counting of votes.


The demonstration for counting was held in Bombay on the 10thFebruary, 1971. We were informed that the votes will becounted according to each assembly constituency. It waspointed out to the Chief Electoral Officer and other officersthat if the counting is assemblywise, each political party willcome to know about its voting strength in each assemblyconstituency. This will not be proper, particularly whenassembly elections are to be held in one years' time.

It was therefore suggested to the Chief Electoral Officer that thevotes may be counted in such a manner that no politicalparty comes to know the voting strength in each assemblyconstituency. The votes could be counted in lots of 50,000voting papers every time after mixing up the voting papersfrom all the assembly constituencies. We request you tokindly look into the matter and do the needful.Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,for BHARATIYA JAN SANGH, BOMBAY

Sd/."

As will appear from that letter, the President of the Bhartiya JanSangh, Bombay wanted to go further than the counting of votes assemblyconstituencywise as under the new procedure ; he wanted that the ballotpapers from different assembly constituencies should be mixed up andthereafter they should be counted in lots of 50,000 ballot papers at atime.

In this connection, a letter received from one Shri S. R. NarayanaAyyar, Advocate, Bombay may also be mentioned. This letter makes veryinteresting reading, recounting an experience of his own life, and is repro-duced below :

"S. R. Narayana Ayyar Advocate,Now at

3C|18, Tata Colony, Bombay 74 (AS)Jan. 13, 1971.

Shri S. P. Sen VermaChief Election Commissioner,New Delhi.

Dear Sir,

Let me congratulate you on the new method of counting which youannounced yesternight in an interview. I have often felt thatthe procedure followed up to now is not secret ballot. Oncea client in a Municipal election told me that he had paid200 Rs. to an Estate Manager for inducing the labourers tovote for him and that not even a single person voted andwanted me to take action against the Manager. I told him

UNREASON IN ELECTION POLITICS 22?

that he would make an ass of himself as it is an offence andhe could not prove it also. I asked him how he knew thatnone of the voters voted for him. He told me that the serialof the Estate wa.s from Number to certain number and theyhad a separate ballot box and when the box was opened hedid not find any vote for him.

I wonder why such a procedure if it was being followed in Britainwas not adopted earlier. Anyhow better late than never.May I suggest one more order from you ? It is this. Thepoor presiding officers and clerks etc. are mortally afraid ofthe candidates. Hence they used to allow them very nearthem when counting. Unless the agents are asked to sita few feet away — say at least 6 ft. if necessary in an ele-vated bench, they will be able to induce the counting clerksetc. to turn the voting papers so that they may see the votes.Hence they should be away and the clerks also should beordered not to count the votes in such a way so as to be seenby the agents. Even they only should see the back of thevoting paper. Some such orders may become fool proof inthe secret voting.

For the information of the public kindly ask every State to publishbefore election the number of voters in the State and also ifpossible by District in the papers.

Wishing you good service in this difficult job of election,

Yours faithfully,Sd/- S. R. Narayana Ayyar"

It is not necessary, however, to burden this Report with extracts fromother letters and communications.

When the rehearsals about the new counting procedure were beingheld at various State capitals under the guidance of senior officials of theCommission, the representatives of various political parties were invited tobe present at the rehearsals and after seeing the new procedure in actionthey were enthusiastically in favour of the new system.

The revised procedure of counting of votes is the same as thatfollowed in the United Kingdom under the U.K. Representation of thePeople Act, 1949. See in this connection rule 46 of the ParliamentaryElections Rules in the Second Schedule to the Representation of thePeople Act, 1949. The entire procedure has been clearly described inSchofield's Parliamentary Elections (Third Edition) pages 350 — 52 andParker's Conduct of Parliamentary Elections (1970 Edition) pages 207et seq. The new procedure is exactly on the lines of the British proce-dure, with the exception that in the United Kingdom even the postalballots are mixed up with the ordinary ballot papers but in our countrythis is not done because number of postal ballots is not as large as in theUnited Kingdom. It may be mentioned here that this counting procedurehas been in vogue in Great Britain at least for full one century, i.e., sincethe Ballot Act of 1872.


The revised procedure, which was made public through the press andRadio before the poll was taken in the Fifth General Election to the LokSabha in 1971, was generally welcomed by the political parties and thepeople. It was particularly welcomed by the Harijans and other weakersections of the community who felt confident that they could exercise theirvote with less fear and lesser intimidation, as in the revised procedure ofvoting, it would be impossible to know how a particular village or a poll-ing area had voted. The Commission is of the definite view that the newprocedure has to an appreciable extent reduced the corrupt practice ofintimidation of voters in the Fifth General Election to the Lok Sabha.This has been proved by the result of elections in several constituenciesfrom where formery candidates belonging to and enjoying the support ofthe affluent and influential sections of the community were generallyreturned.

It may be pointed out that the revised procedure of counting cannotin any way affect the result of the poll which will depend entirely uponthe markings on the ballot papers. The object of the revised procedureis only to deny the information which could be used for intimidating andcoercing sections of the electorate, particularly those belonging to the weakerelements of the community and to make the secrecy of voting more perfectand secure. '

On the 15th January, 1971, the Commission sent the following circularletter to the Chief Electoral Officers of all States and Union territories :

"IMMEDIATE

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIATalkatora Road,New Delhi-1.

No. 470/71 Dated the 15th January, 1971.To


Subject : Counting of votes—New Procedure.Sir,

I am directed to say that at present ballot papers contained in ballotboxes used at polling stations in elections from a parliamentary or assemblyconstituency are counted polling station-wise. This practice has been invogue in this country since the time of the First General Elections of 1951-52 as it is in consonance with the existing rules, such as rule 55(1) andrule 56(7) of the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961. It is no doubt truethat ballot boxes used at more polling stations than one may be openedsimultaneously for counting the ballot papers contained therein but thisis done by counting officers, that is, counting supervisors and countingassistants separately and polling station-wise. There is, in the opinion ofthe Commission, a drawback in this procedure of counting because it mayenable not only the counting staff but also the candidates, their electionagents and their counting agents to know in favour of which candidatethe majority of the voters assigned to a particular polling station have casttheir votes. This in its turn may cause the voters not to turn up at pollingstations for the purpose of casting their votes because of their fear that


thereafter they may be intimidated, pressurised and coerced by influentialpersons after the declaration of the results. The possibility of a threat ofintimidation like this cannot be altogether ruled out. As a matter of fact,the Commission has received a number of representations, sometimes evenanonymous (because the persons making the representations out of feardid not like to disclose their identity).

After considering the matter in all its aspects, the Commission hastherefore decided that henceforth the existing practice of counting of votespolling stationwise should be given up and the practice which has been invogue in the United Kingdom should be followed. According to thatparctice it will not be possible for any person present at the time of countingto detect or to know the general trend of voting at any particular pollingstation in any election. The practice may be described as follows:—

(1) In the first place, the ballot papers contained in any ballotbox or boxes used at any polling station should be taken outfirst after observing all the formalities i.e. according to theprovisions of sub-rule (2) of rule 55 of the Conduct of Elec-tions Rules, 1961 according to which before opening a ballotbox at a counting table, the counting agents present at thattable shall be allowed to inspect the paper seal or such otherseal as might have been affixed thereon and to satisfy them-selves that it is intact. The returning officer shall then satisfyhimself that none of the ballot box or boxes have in fact beentampered with. If the returning officer is satisfied that anyballot box has in fact been tampered with, he shall not countthe ballot papers contained in that particular ballot box.

(2) Thereafter the counting staff, under the supervision of thereturning officer, shall count the number of the ballot papersso found in the ballot box or boxes and see whether that num-ber tallies with the number of ballot papers issued to votersat the polling station other than the ballot papers cancelled orballot papers used as tendered ballot papers and as mentionedin Part I of the ballot paper account in Form 16. If there beany discrepancy between the two numbers, then, that alsoshould be noted in the ballot paper account.

(3) After this, the ballot papers found in the ballot box or boxesused at the polling station should be placed in a big drum orother receptacle the lid of which should be kept tightly closed.

(4) The above procedure should be followed in respect of theballot box or boxes used at every polling station and this proce-dure may be adopted simultaneously at different countingtables.

(5) After the ballot papers found in all the ballot boxes used at allthe polling stations within the constituency have been placedin the big drum or other receptacle as aforesaid, they will bemixed up together slowly with a wooden ladle or other instru-ment with a smooth surface so that no ballot paper h damagedor spoiled in the process of mixing up.

3 EC/72—16


(6) Thereafter the returning officer (which expression also includesthe assistant returning officer) shall rill as many empty ballotboxes as there are counting tables with such ballot papers andplace each such box in the custody of the counting supervisorat each counting table. This procedure will be repeated tillthe counting of all the ballot papers in the big drum or otherreceptacle is completed.

(7) Thereafter, as each handful of ballot papers is taken out bythe counting staff, they will be sorted candidate-wise andcounted and kept in convenient bundles of fifty in separatetrays for separate candidates.

(8) In the course of sorting, if any ballot paper appears to bedoubtful to the counting staff, then they also will be kept ina separate tray.

(9) Thereafter the procedure hitherto followed will be observed.

This procedure will reduce the law and order problem at the time ofcounting.

Necessary amendments are being made in the relevant rules and therelevant forms.

You are requested to send sufficient number of copies of theseinstructions to all the returning officers and counting staff and everybodyelse concerned.

You may kindly note that this new procedure will be applicable inrelation to the counting of votes cast in the forthcoming general electionsand in all subsequent bye-elections and general elections to the House ofthe People and State Legislative Assemblies.

Yours faithfully,(Sd.) A. N. SEN, Secy."

When several days after the declaration of the results the allegationof rigging the elections by means of chemical treatment of ballot papersand invisible ink etc. was first made then, it was concocted by a fertilebrain that this new counting procedure was also introduced to carry thisheinous design of chemicalisation of ballot papers to its successful fruition.

In the Report of the Joint Committee of Parliament on amendmentsto the Election Law, there is a minute of dissent in which it has beenargued that there was hardly any necessity in introducing the new countingprocedure. In support of his view, the learned member has quoted a para-graph from the Report of the Election Commission on the Fourth GeneralElections in India held in 1967. With great respect to what has been statedin that Report, it is humbly submitted that it is difficult to agree with theconclusions mentioned in that paragraph because those conclusions do notappear to have been based upon the actual experience of what sometimeshappens in particular polling stations. It is mentioned in the Report thatthe Commission used to receive suggestions for introducing the new countingprocedure. No adequate ground or reason has been advanced for thedoubt that victimisation and harassment of particular areas is not true to


any appreciable extent. Even if the allegation of victimisation and harass-ment of voters in any particular area is not true to some extent, even thenit is felt that there is a very good case for the introduction of the newprocedure. The point is in a free democracy and in elections which aresupposed to be free and fair for all the voters, why shopld not a procedurebe introduced if it helps in ensuring such free and fair elections for alleliminating intimidation, harassment and victimisation even for a few. Thenit is also difficult to agree that the new method has no merit of being sys-tematic. The detailed instructions given to the returning officers clearlyshow that the new method is as systematic as the old one. This method,as already stated, has been in vogue in Great Britain at least for full onehundred years. It is also difficult to agree with the statement in that Reportthat the political parties if they are so minded can find out broadly howa particular area voted. When the ballot papers of all the polling stationsin an assembly constituency are mixed together after the initial countingit is simply not possible for any political party or for any candidate to haveany idea as to the trend of voting in any particular polling area or areas.It is therefore difficult to agree with what was stated in the Report on theFourth General Elections.

And in any case no positive case has been made out that the newmethod has some inherent defects.

Then it has been stated that the new counting procedure was not inconformity with the substantive provisions contained in section 64A of theRepresentation of the People Act, 1951. It may be pointed out that ihiscontention does not appear to be sound and valid. How the new procedureis not in conflict with section 64A is shown below :—

The condition precedent for the attraction of section 64A is that atany time before the counting of votes is completed ballot papers (whetherall or some) used at a polling station must be unlawfully taken out of thecustody of the returning officer by whom counting is done or must beaccidentally or intentionally destroyed or lost or damaged or tampered with.This condition obviously refers to the period after the poll is over. Now thefollowing contingencies may occur :—

(i) Ballot papers used at a polling station may be unlawfully takenaway or accidentally or intentionally destroyed etc. when theballot box or boxes containing the ballot papers is or are ontheir way from the polling station concerned to the placewhere the ballot box or boxes will be kept under strong guardsunder the overall control of the returning officer. In such acase there is no difficulty because the ballot papers used atthe polling station or some of them have been unlawfully takenaway or destroyed etc., and from the records of the returningofficer he could easily find out the total number of ballot papersissued to the polling officer of that particular polling station.Whether all of them were actually used at a polling station isentirely a different matter. Even if we assume that all theballot papers issued to that polling station were used becauseall the voters assigned to that polling station turned out forcasting their votes, even then there is no difficulty. In such a


case, after the completion of the counting is over, if it be foundthat the difference between the largest number of votes obtain-ed by one 6f the candidates and the next largest number ofvotes obtained by a second candidate is more than the totalnumber of ballot papers issued to that polling station, thenthere is absolutely no necessity for holding a fresh poll. If,however, it is found that the difference is less than the totalnumber of ballot papers assigned to the polling station, thenunder clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 64A, the Elec-tion Commission, shall direct a fresh poll at that pollingstation.

(ii) If the ballot papers (whether all or some) contained in the boxor boxes used at a polling station are unlawfully taken outor destroyed etc. while they are in safe custody of the return-ing officer, then also what has been stated above, will apply.There is no difficulty in this case also.

(iii) If the ballot papers (whether all or some) used at a particularpolling station are unlawfully taken out or destroyed etc. whilethey are on the way from the place of custody to the countingplace or while the initial counting of the ballot papers of thatparticular polling station is going on under the direct supervi-sion of the returning officer and under strong police guards allround, even then there is no difficulty and what has been statedunder (i) will apply.

(iv) If, however, after the initial counting has been over and theballot papers have been made into bundles in accordance withthe instructions issued by the Election Commission and thebundles have been mixed up, if at such a stage, a number ofbundles of ballot papers is unlawfully taken out or destroyedetc., then also, it is not difficult to resolve the difficulty satis-factorily. In such a case, the following procedure can beadopted by the Election Commission :—

The Election Commission on receipt of report referred to in sub-section (1) of section 64A may first direct the returningofficer to get from Part II of the Ballot Paper Accounts ofthe various polling stations within the assembly constituency,the total number of ballot papers found in the ballot boxesused at all these polling stations and thereafter to ascertainthe total number of ballot papers which have not been des-troyed or lost etc. The difference between these two totalnumbers will be the number of ballot papers destroyed orlost. After this the Commission may direct the returningofficer to complete the counting of the remaining ballotpapers. If on the completion of such counting it is foundthat the difference between the votes obtained by the leadingcandidate and the votes obtained by the next candidate islarger than the total number of ballot papers destroyed orlost, then instead of directing any fresh poll at any polling


station, the Commission may direct the returning officer todeclare the result of the election. If however, the differencebetween the number of votes obtained by the leading candi-date and the number of votes obtained by the next candidateis less than the total number of ballot papers destroyed orlost, the Election Commission may immediately direct thereturning officer to separate the ballot papers polling station-wise by reference to the distinguishing mark, the signature ofthe presiding officer, the Returning Officer's Register andthe ballot paper account in form 16, for the purpose ofascertaining to which particular polling station or stationsthe ballot papers which have been unlawfully taken out ordestroyed etc. actually belonged and after having ascertain-ed that, to take a fresh poll in that particular polling stationor stations in accordance with clause (a) of sub-section (2)of section 64A. Thus from whatever angle we look at thepoint, there is no difficulty in separating the ballot papersand the new procedure, in no way, contravenes or runs con-trary to any of the provisions of the Election Law eithercontained in the Act or in the Rules.

A point has again been made that in the process of mixing up, someof the ballot papers may be lost. This is absolutely incorrect because afterthe initial country of the ballot papers polling station-wise according to theinstructions of the Election Commission, the ballot papers are made intoconvenient bundles of 25, 30 and 40 or even 50. Those bundles are thenkept together by rubber bands. Therefore, there is absolutely no chance ofany ballot paper being lost in the process of mixing up.

Shortly after the new procedure was introduced, senior officers of theElection Commission held rehearsals at the various State capitals to showto the Chief Electoral Officers and the Returning Officers the actual workingof the new procedure. At such rehearsals the representatives of the variouspolitical parties were invited and many of them attended. After the rehear-sals were over, everybody expressed complete satisfaction with the newprocedure.

The effect of the new procedure has been immediately felt. This time,after the elections were over, very few complaints as to intimidation,coercion or victimisation were received from any quarter of the countryand the voters belonging to the weaker sections of the community wereby and large able for the first time to cast their votes in an absolutely freemanner according to their own free will and choice. It was only after theresults of the election went against some parties that all sorts of fantasticallegations relating to the new procedure started being made.

But then even several days after the declaration of the results in theFifth General Election and the due constitution of the new Lok Sabha andwhile the new Lok Sabha was in session, the Commission received a letterthat the poor Harijans were being subjected to great hardships in villageKhanjarpur, near Modinagar, tehsil Ghaziabad, district Meerut in U.P. Thereason for this harassment was clear because the candidate supported bythe powerful sections of the community had been defeated in the election.The whole letter is quoted below :


"Shri S. P. Sen-Verma, Election Commissioner, New Delhi.Sir,

I am profoundly grateful to your Secretary for giving a sympathetichearing on the phone. I am sorry to inform you that in village Khanjarpur(Near Modinagar) Tehsil Ghaziabad, Distt. Meerut which has the leadingmajority of Jats, the poor Harijans are being subject to great hardships dueto this recent elections.

Their only fault is that they have exercised their right of vote againstthe wishes of the majority. They dared to do this on various statementsissued by you and other leaders which were published in the paper guaran-teeing their safety in future.

That it has become impossible for them even to earn for their existence,or to exist in the village.

That daily they are subject to ill treatment by the hands of the majo-rity and as well as by the hands of police which are blindly backing themajority, irrespective of the fact that the Distt. Magistrate and the SeniorSupdt. of police have already been informed.

That if they will not be protected, it will become very difficult in futureto have a fair election in the country.

It is therefore requested that an immediate strong action be planned tosave them.

An early reply in the matter will be much appreciated.Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,Bhagwat Sahai

Dated : 30th March, 1971. Tibra Road, Modinagar."The allegations made in the letter, if true, show how difficult it is to

root out a social evil. But the evil has already dwindled substantiallyand in course of time will altogether vanish from our election scene. Theweaker sections of the community must on their part take courage and mustbe bold enough to stand against this scourge without fear of the strongerand more affluent elements of society.

Upon all these considerations, the Commission is definitely of the viewthat for the sake of free and fair elections, the new counting procedureshould not be given up.

CHAPTER XIV

REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM : THELIST SYSTEM

1. "Democracy not only requires an appropriate temper: It alsorequires appropriate institutions. Not the least important of thoss institu-tions, especially in its bearing on party, is the electorate, and the methodsby which the electorate votes. Here, so far as the evidence goes, it wouldappear to suggest that a method of voting by the method of proportionalrepresentation ultimately tends, when it is pushed to its logical conclusions,to accentuate and exacerbate party, and to make it assume the character ofan end in itself, and not a means in a system of democratic government.If each party can be assured of its proportionate share, every party willdo its utmost to secure that share. There is indeed a great difference bet-ween the system which is advocated for England by the ProportionalRepresentation Society and the integral system of some other countrieswhich only allow the voter to vote for prepared party lists in many-memberconstituencies. But if we once begin to listen to the logic of mathematics,we may easily be driven by that logic beyond our original intention. Ifwe desire to escape the growth of over-mighty parties, and if we preferto keep a member in close touch with his constituency rather than assignhim directly to his party, we shall be wise to keep the single-member con-stituency and a simple method of voting. By the logic of mathematicsthey may be dubious. But the real question we have to solve is not aquestion of mathematical logic. It is a question of what best suits thelogic—and not only the logic, but also the life—of democracy. Dictatorshave sometimes climbed to power on the ruined steps of proportionalrepresentation."

—Ernest Barker, The Citizens' Choice, Chapter II, "The Break-down of Democracy."

2. "On the pretext of preventing a 'tyranny of the majority' and pro-tecting the political minority the advocates of proportional representationare really thinking more of the narrower interests of their own group. Once,however, such a minority becomes a majority it is no longer interested inproportional representation.

—Karl J. Newman, European Democracy between the Wars, (1970Edition), page 88.

3. "Critics of the present system have concentrated their criticism ontiie aspect of representation system. But in assessing an electoral system,one must bear in mind its two purposes, namely, its representative "aspectand its purpose of providing a group of people able to govern effectively.The fate of the 4th French Republic in 1958 is a reminder that the twopurposes are not always compatible. The problem of any constitution isto balance the two purposes but, if there is a clash, the tradition of the

235

236 REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM:THE LIST SYSTEM

British constitution is to err on the side of the effective government ratherthan democratic institution on the basis that stable government is in thelong-term interests of democracy."

—Glyn Parry, British Government (1969 Edition), page 85.

In this Chapter, it is proposed to say a few words about the electoralsystem. There is a demand in some quarters for changing the presentelectoral system altogether. It has been stated since after the Fifth GeneralElection to the Lok Sabha in 1971, that the entire method of election shouldbe changed and replaced by the proportional representation system, special-ly by that variety thereof which is known as the list system.

It may be stated that one variety of the p.r. system, namely, the singletransferable vote system is already in vogue in our country in smaller elec-tions to the offices of the President and the Vice-President of India, inelections to the Rajya Sabha and in elections to the Legislative Councilsof the States having such Councils. The demand now is that anothervariety of the p.r. system, namely, the list system should be introduced inelections to the House of the People and the State Legislative Assemblies inlieu of the present plurality system of voting in single member constituencieswhich has been in vogue since the adoption of the Constitution and evenbefore. The system of plurality, i.e. relative majority (but not necessarilyan absolute majority) is in vogue in elections to the House of Commonsof the Parliament of the United Kingdom and in elections to the LowerHouses in various Commonwealth countries by and large. In the Stateof Tasmania, one of the component States of the Commonwealth of Aus-tralia, p.r. system has been in vogue for a long time but it has not beenadopted by any other State of the Australian Commonwealth. Even in theUnited States where the Presidential system of government under whibhthe chief executive is not responsible to the Legislature, is in vogue, the p.r.system in any of its form has not been adopted. This does not imply thatthe p.r. system cannot be in vogue in countries in which parliamentarysystem of government prevails with the chief executive such as the Cabinetbeing collectively responsible to the Lower House. As a matter of factthe three Scandinavian Kingdoms of Sweden, Norway and Denmark com-bine parliamentary government with the p.r. system. Both Sweden andNorway have list system, whereas Denmark has tried to work out a compli-cated plan of combining single member constituencies with p.r.

No system of voting, whether the present plurality system of voting orthe proposed list system of voting or any other variety of the p.r. systemcan be termed good or bad in the abstract, that is to say, can be regardedas either intrinsically and inherently good or intrinsically and inherently bad.The system which might have worked well in one country under one setof political conditions and circumstances may prove to be quite unworkableand therefore not acceptable in other countries with different politicalconditions and circumstances. The reason is simple. Politics like mathe-matics is not an a priori science. It is an empirical study. Therefore thevalue and utility of any political institution or system will depend uponthe conditions, circumstances, attitude of the people, the liking which thepeople have developed for the institution and the system because of its

REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM : 237THE LIST SYSTEM

simplicity, its long continued existence in their midst and its overall effectupon the social, political and economic institutions, which they serve. Thepresent plurality system of voting, that is, the relative majority but notnecessarily an absolute majority in single-member constituencies has, asalready pointed out, been in vogue in our elections by and large since theFirst General Elections of 1951-52. There had been a few double-memberconstituencies but they were abolished in 1961 and since then all parlia-mentary and assembly constituencies in our country have been single-mem-ber constituencies. Even before the adoption of the Constitution, thisplurality system of voting was in vogue in elections in our country withlimited franchise. The people of this country have been accustomed tothis system. Therefore, before we discard this system for the list systemof voting or any other variety of the p.r. system, we must very carefullyconsider all aspects of the matter. India is a vast country with a populationof over 547 millions and an electorate in the neighbourhood of about 300millions. First of all we are to consider whether the list system with itscomplexity would be properly workable in this vast country. A peculiarthing to be noticed about the list system or any other form of the p.r.system is that it is not in vogue in any big country of the world at present.

The list system was in vogue in the Weimar Republic of Germany inelections to the Reichstag from 1919 to 1933 and it has been stated byeminent writers that it was responsible for the collapse of the WeimarRepublic and the emergence of Hitler and his Nazi party to power in the1930—September elections. The p.r. system before that led to the emer-gence of fasicism in Italy. The p.r. system was abandoned in France whenthe Constitution of the Fifth Republic was adopted in 1958. As Glyn Parryhas said in his "British Government", the fate of the Fourth French Repub-lic in 1958 is a reminder that the two purposes of an electoral system,namely, its representative aspect and its purpose of providing a group ofpeople able to govern effectively, are not always compatible. The systemnow in vogue in France is the majority system of election in single-mem-ber constituencies with the traditional double voting or run off elections orthe second ballot. After the Second World War, in the Federal Republicof Germany (West Germany), list system of Weimar days was given up.The Germans have now instituted two major innovations. First, a party isexcluded from all representation if it fails to receive a specified percentageof the total vote. In Bavaria, this percentage is as high as 10 per cent, inothers 5 per cent. Obviously such provision deals the death blow to smallersplinter groups. In the second place, the electoral system while excludingsmaller parties as above, seeks to combine plurality system (relativemajority) and p.r. system by providing that half of the representatives areto be elected by plurality, i.e., relative majority, and the other half on thebasis of party lists put forward by each party in each Land. Each Landis given a certain* number of seats to fill. But there is already a growingfeeling that this hybrid system should be abandoned in favour of Britishplurality system with single-member constituencies. The plurality system,as under this hybrid system with the elimination of splinter groups of theelectorate of the Federal Republic of Germany, has become increasinglypolarized into two dominant parties, the Christian and the Social Demo-cratic with a small Liberal party as in Great Britain. According to one

238 REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM :THE LIST SYSTEM

writer the recent emergence of extreme nationalism is also cited as a reasonfor adopting the British model.

In the Irish Republic the single transferable vote system has been invogue although in 1958 De Valera tried to abolish it; the proposal passedthrough Irish Parliament but was rejected on a referendum by the people.P.r. is in vogue in Switzerland. It is a complex variant of the list system.P.r. was adopted for election to the Lower House of the Swiss federallegislature in 1919. It has been said that by the "Swiss method an almostmathematical reproduction of the existing views in the community isachieved in the legislative body. The considerable division of parties underthis system cannot, however, endanger the conduct of the executive govern-ment since the Swiss Executive Council does not feel obliged to resign if thevote in the Legislature is adverse to its recommendations."

Of all the countries Belgium appears to be the first country to adoptthe p.r. of the list system variety. The voter has to choose one of the seve-ral lists presented by the various political parties, each list containing thenames of candidates chosen by a party, but at the same time he is entitledto indicate his preference within the list of his choice. In the Netherlands,the p.r. system of the Belgian variety prevails but the whole country isconstituted as one single electoral constituency or district. It is noteworthythat both Belgium and Holland have parliamentary system of governmentwith fairly remarkable ministerial stability.

The idea of p.r. has been in the air long before Thomas Hare of•England published his book on the subject before 1857. In 1793 theFrench National Convention considered it without any action. It was elabo-rated by a French mathematician named Gergonne in 1820 and indepen-dently developed by an English school master, Thomas Wright Hill whoseson took it to Australia in 1839. In Switzerland Victor Cousiderant pro-posed p.r. system to the Council of Geneva in 1842. In 1844 ThomasGidfan prepared another plan for p.r. Then twelve years later in 1856,Carl Andrae, a Danish finance minister worked out a system of p.r. Nextyear, i.e., in 1857, was published Thomas Hare's book on p.r.

J. S. Mill in his Representative Government strongly supported thesystem. A few years later another man of great ability, insight and experi-ence, Walter Bagehot in his famous book "The English Constitution"equally strongly opposed it. But Mill and Bagehot were both liberals.Mill was a Liberal of the left, Bagehot was a Liberal of the right. Mill wasalso an ardent individualist and being an individualist he supported p.r.on grounds of reason and justice. Bagehot on the other hand opposed iton an assessment of the true functions of the majority and minority inParliament. The function of the former is to support the action of theGovernment, that of the latter is to criticise such action. This dual functionof Parliament to support action and to criticise action of Government,enables parliament to represent the whole people. This famous propositionBagehot propounded in the chapter on the House of Commons in theEnglish Constitution. And this led him to oppose vehemently the p.r.

REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANCE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM : 239THE LIST SYSTEM

system, although he did admit that the minority party in a constituency mayquite often go unrepresented in the House of Commons. He told hisreaders—

"I have myself had a vote for an agricultural county for twentyyears, and I am a Liberal; but two Tories have always beenreturned and all my life will be returned. As matters nowstand, my vote is of no use. But if I could combine with 1,000other Liberals in that and other Conservative counties, wemight choose a Liberal member."

Bagehot saw a few other advantages too in the p.r. system but the defectswhich he saw in the system far outweighed the merits. He apprehendedand perhaps rightly that the so-called central party organizers would becomeall powerful bosses and parliament would lose that moderation whichevery deliberative body, the "Grand Inquest" of the nation is expected topossess.

Henry Sidgwick another noted political writer also strongly expressedhimself against p.r. In his book "The Elements of Politics" he foregasta Parliament consisting of "Total abstainers, Anti-Vivisectionists, Anti-Vaccinationists" and so on. This forecast remarkably came true in theGerman Reichstag under Weimar Republic when an anti-drink party, a warinvalids' and survivors' party, a landlords, peasants and winegrowers'league, a Saxon country people's party, etc. contested the Reichstagelections.

In France, Esmein foresaw that p.r. would lead to chaos and anarchy.Whatever the variety of the p.r. system—whether it is the single trans-

ferable vote system or the list system or any other variety, the central andfundamental idea is the same:—it is to secure a representative assemblyreflecting with almost mathematical exactness the opinions of the varioussegments and divisions of the electorate. We have seen that this systemachieves by avoiding waste of the votes of the minority parties and groups.The voicelessness of voters belonging to a minority party or parties is elimi-nated to a large extent. The difficulties and problems as to delimitation ofa large number of single-member constituencies are solved to a great extentbecause the whole country is divided into a comparatively few very largemulti-member constituencies. The danger of gerrymandering also is elimi-nated to a large extent. But in India gerrymandering in the delimitationof constituencies hardly exists as delimitation is done by an independeatDelimitation Commission according to clear principles and guidelines laiddown in law made by Parliament. But these advantages of the p.r. systemat what price ? We have seen that the p.r. has been in vogue by and largeonly in small countries. No big country in the world has adopted it. InFrance it has been given up wholly and in Germany also it has been givenup to a substantial extent. All the countries where it is in vogue todayare all small countries—small in size, small in population. Even in someof these countries we often hear criticisms of the system. The system hasa strong tendency to lead, and quite often leads, to multiplicity of politicalparties and groups in Parliament and in practice almost in every country

240 REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM :THE LIST SYSTEM

it has led to emergence of a large number of political parties and groups.The inevitable result of this is coalition government with all its attendantevils of instability, failure on the part of the coalition partners to come toan agreed decision on any major policy matter etc. This is specially sowhere the system of Government is parliamentary as in India. At the timeof a national crisis like war and external aggression it may lead to gravenational danger even. In peace time a coalition government cannot carryout any programme of national development because serious differencesamong the members of the coalition may crop up. A coalition governmentis always a weak government, it is hardly in a position to put any welfarepolicy into practice because the partners of the coalition are very likely tomove in different directions in their approach and attitude. We have seenthe sordid effects of coalition governments in our country in a number ofStates after the 1967-General Elections. Prof. Laski in his Grammar ofPolitics (1967—5th Edn.) lays down four general tests for a good electoralsystem—

(1) It ought to enable the Legislative Assembly to embody the opinionsof the majority and the minority in great issues of public interest; it neednot, indeed, if it is to be effective, it cannot embody the total drift of opinion"with effort of mathematical precision;

(2) The constituencies which return members must be small enoughto enable candidates to be known in a genuine way, so that after electiona personal relation develops between the constituents and the elected mem-bers;

(3) There must be a means between two general elections of checkingany drift in public opinion among the voters by the method of bye-elections:

(4) Fourthly, the electoral system should be so organized that thevoters are as directly related as possible to the Government. They mustbe able to feel that it is their choice and it is as a government that it willcome before them for scrutiny when the term of legislative office expires.

He rejected p.r. on these grounds. Then he referred to a number ofpractical difficulties—

(1) Multi-member large- sized constituencies intensify the complexityof choice. In India even single-member parliamentary constituencies willhave each an average population of at least a million this time.

(2) This will lead to an undue increase in the power of party organizersand bosses in elections.

(3) The candidate would become simply an item in the list : electorswould vote for him almost entirely on party grounds. The prospect ofpersonal relation between a candidate (and if elected, a member) and hisconstituents would be completely destroyed in the list system. A voter willonly know for which party list he has voted; he scarcely knows any of thecandidates in the list.

(4) The Government would necessarily be a weak one without thatbody of support which enables it to execute a great programme.

REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM : 241THE LIST SYSTEM

(5) It would be wellnigh impossible to test changes in public opinionsby means of bye-elections.

(6) The responsibility of the private member would be diminished toa large extent by increasing his sense that whatever his personal effort theparty organizers who maintain the list of candidates would be able toensure his return, if he remains subservient to them. Individual talent andworth would definitely be at a discount. In this way public interest inpolitics would decline.

Citing Prof. Herman Finer, Laski says that even the view that theminority remains unrepresented is not correct. "The horizon of a minority"says Finer, "is not limited by the boundaries of a constituency". Thegovernment of a country is not carried on by presenting to the legislativeassembly alternatives which be either fully accepted or fully rejected. Theprocess is one of give and take, of compromise. Political decisions for thegovernance of the country are not made by an arithmetical process ofcounting votes. Decisions in a democracy are result of debate and discus-sion on the floor of parliament and the end result is obtained by accom-modating the principal views of the opposition parties as far as possibleand consistent with the basic principles and policies of the party in power.

Carl. J. Friedrich of Harvard University in his book 'ConstitutionalGovernment and Democracy' says at pages 305 et seq—"Since proportional'representation in the long run strengthens, rather than weakens, party, andthat means machine control, the bosses return with another rampart addedto their fortress. Some cities have tried it, and the results are not encoura-ging." And he quoted the opinion of an experienced American (NewtonD. Baker) about his experiments—

"We have groups of all sorts and kinds, formed around religious,racial, language, social and other contentious distinctions. Propor-tional representation invites these groups to seek to hardenand intensify their differences by bringing them into politicalaction where they are irrelevant, if not disturbing. A wiseelection system would invite them to forget these distractingprejudices."

To sum up, the principal defects of the list system appear to me tobe as follows :—

(1) Multiplicity of political parties without any party having anabsolute majority in the legislature and consequent attemptsto form coalition government. Coalition government is unstablegovernment. It cannot last long because of its inherent weak-nesses.

(2) That in its turn leads to an enormous increase in the powerof the bureaucracy and to frequent elections at short intervalswhich tend to exasperate the electorate and they lose interest inpolitics and elections. It may even lead to the emergenceof dictatorship as in fascist Italy or Nazi Germany.

(3) Multi-member large constituencies and long lists of candidatesproduced by the contesting parties destroy the direct relation-ship between individual candidates and voters. At the next

242 REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANCE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM :THE LIST SYSTEM

delimitation in this country the average population of a single-member parliamentary constituency will in any case be morethan one million. If the constituencies are multi-memberconstituencies, as they will have to be under the list system,then in a multi-member constituency having, say, at least fivemembers to elect, the average population will be more thanfive millions and the electorate will be about three millions.How this will work in a vast country like India, it is not easyto imagine.

(4) The list system may be regarded as unconstitutional as in-fringing the provisions of article 81 and article 170 of theConstitution of India—which provide for the election of mem-bers of the House of the People and the State LegislativeAssemblies by direct election from territorial constituencies.But when voters are asked to choose one of the several lists,the element of directness of election at once seems to vanish;voters will not vote directly for individual candidates, theywill vote only for the lists. On this ground alone, the pro-posal is liable to be rejected.

(5) Even scrutiny of nomination papers will be a difficult job.Not only unduly long time will be taken by the returningofficers for scrutiny, but what will happen to a list if one ortwo or more out of several candidates in the list are founddisqualified,—will the whole list be rejected or only the namesof those found disqualified or not qualified, be omitted fromthe list and new names substituted in their place. As thismay entail more time, the entire time-table of election maybe upset and this may even produce a constitutional breakdown.

(6) There will be enormous increase in the powers of the centralparty organizers and bosses leading to the emergence of bos-sism in politics which is extremely baneful for the growth ofhealthy democratic institutions.

(7) It may lead to even national disintegration. As Dr. Finer inhis book "The Theory and Practice of Modern Government"observes at page 557 "A human tendency may be either pro-moted or counteracted by an institution. And the separatistmentality is promoted by the automatic list system and coun-teracted by the single-member majority system."

(8) The system is extremely complex. We have seen that evenin elections on small scale under the single transferable votesystem such as Presidential election, voters who are electedmembers of the Houses of Parliament and elected members ofthe State Legislative Assemblies sometimes spoil ballot papersin indicating their preferences and demand fresh ballot papers.I came across such a case in the Presidential election ofAugust, 1969 when polling was going on in the ParliamentHouse. One cannot even imagine what will happen to theordinary voter in a multi-member constituency which will have

REFLECTIONS ON THE CHANGE OF ELECTORAL SYSTEM , 243THE LIST SYSTEM

an electorate of about three millions. We should not forgetthat even now about 70 per cent of the people and thereforeof the electorate are illiterate. Chaos and confusion are boundto follow at the time of poll and counting. One even shud-ders at the chaos and confusion which will follow on thepolling day at the various polling stations among the voters andpolling personnel. Counting too also will be extremely dif-ficult. Mistakes in hundreds are bound to be committedin the process of counting .

Then, we should bear in mind that the object of a general election ina parliamentary democracy is not only to constitute a new legislature butalso to form a new government. As Laski and other writers have said,—it is not likely that the difficulties and problems of the modern state aresuch as to be at all seriously remediable by reforms of the electoralmachinery. Mainly, those difficulties and problems are moral in character.We shall meet them rather by the elevation of the popular standard of in-telligence and the reform of economic system than by making men chooseand elect in proportion to the neatly graded volume of opinion. Laskisays, that the p.r. system where it has been tried has not noticeably im-proved the standards of public life. Laski concludes "A State dividedinto equal electoral districts, each returning one single member to theLegislative Assembly seems therefore to be the general lesson of historicexperience."

I conclude this topic with what has been stated by a recent Germanwriter (Pro. Karl J. Newman) in his book "European Democracy betweenthe Wars" (1970), page 88—

"On the pretext of preventing a 'tyranny of the majority' andprotecting the political minority the advocates of proportionalrepresentation are really thinking more of the narrower in-terests of their own group. Once, however, such minoritybecomes a majority, it is no longer interested in the propor-tional representation."

In support of this view, the writer has cited the authority of George Horwill'Proportional Representation', London, 1925.

Upon all these considerations the clear conclusion seems to emergethat the list system or any other variety of proportional representation willnot be the proper electoral system for India to adopt for elections to theHouse of the People and the State Legislative Assemblies.

CHAPTER XV

CONCLUSION

1. "I know no safe depositing of the ultimate power of society butthe people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough, toexercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not totake it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."

—Thomas Jefferson to Willian C. Jarvis, Monticello, September28, 1820.

2. " the study of the causes of poverty is the study of thecauses of degradation of a large part of mankind."

—Alfred Marshall in his "Principles of Economics", page 2 (8thEdition).

We have seen by an analysis of the past elections, specially the FifthGeneral Elections to the Lok Sabha and to the various State LegislativeAssemblies, 1971-72, that by adult suffrage, people of India, the ultimaterulers of this country have started rediscovering themselves and assertingtheir legitimate rights and claims. They have proved by their act and con-duct that mere shibboleths, jargons and high sounding words cannot mis-lead them unless the ideas contained in those shibboleths, jargons and highsounding words are translated into actuality. But there are two seriousroadblocks in their forward movement. The first is the lack of educationfor a majority of them and the second is their abject economic conditions.Even now more than 71 per cent of the population of this country areilliterate, in spite of the expiry of more than 22 years after the commence-ment of the Constitution, article 45 of which has laid down the DirectivePrinciples of State Policy for an endeavour to provide within a periodof ten years from the commencement of the Constitution for free andcompulsory education for all children of the country until they completethe age of fourteen years. Had this endeavour materialised even by thistime, then the position of the people of this country would have beenvastly different from what it is today. Otherwise it will not be possiblefor the people to establish their political and economic supremacy becauseas Karl Marx said as early as in the year 1852 that adult suffrage is es-sentially and fundamentally a working class doctrine and if adult suff-rage is properly and honestly worked, then and only then there is hopethat social and economic transformation of the community could beachieved through peaceful and nonviolent means.

The other factor which I have already mentioned is the abject povertyof the people. Even now we are told 44 per cent of the people livebelow the poverty line. That means that about 225 millions of the people

244

CONCLUSION 245

of India live a life of hunger and insecurity. This sordid condition musthave to be brought to an end so that the people can live a better andfuller life. Talks about morals and 'dharma' do not appeal to a manwhose belly is empty. A hungry man cannot be a religious man. Stillit is a great credit to the common man and woman that more often thannot they silently suffer hardships and privations without protest. Theymust be made hunger free as quickly as possible before it its too late.This is why thousands of years ago, the Unpanishad said—

"Make wealth as much as you can. That is the vrata (vow) of life."

We want food for the body first so that we can have food for the mind andthe soul. Bernard Shaw described poverty and its effect in the dialogue bet-ween Cusins and Undershaft in his 'Major Barbara' as follows:—

"CUS1NS. Do you call poverty a crime?

UNDERSHAFT. The worst of crimes. All the other crimes arevirtues beside it: all the other dishonours are chivalry itself bycomparison. Poverty blights whole cities; spreads horrible pesti-lences; strikes dead the very souls of all who come withiasight, sound or smell of it. What you call crime is nothing:a murder here and a theft there, a blow now and a curse then:what do they matter? they are only the accidents and illnessesof life: there are not fifty genuine professional criminals inLondon. But there are millions of poor people, abject people,dirty people, ill fed, ill clothed people. They poison usmorally and physically: they kill the happiness of society:they force us to do away with our own liberties and to ©r-ganize unnatural cruelties for fear they should rise against usand drag us down into their abyss. Only fools fear crime :we all fear poverty. Pah; [turning on Barbara] you talk ofyour halt-saved ruffian in West Ham: you accuse me of drag-ging his soul back to perdition. Well, bring him to me here;and I will drag his soul back again to salvation for you.Not by words and dreams; but by thirtyeight shillings a week,a sound house in a handsome street, and a permanent job.In three weeks he will have a fancy waistcoat; in three months.a tall hat and a chapel sitting; before the end of the year hewill shake hands with a duchess at a Primrose League meeting,and join the Conservative Party."

Economic improvement in man's condition gives him a sense of dignity,self-confidence, honesty and integrity. If education, a liberal educatioaspreads among the people and if their economic lot is improved, thencorrupt and evil practices will completely disappear from our elections-thereby making democracy absolutely safe in India.

S. P. Sen-Varna.,

New Delhi,29th September, 1972.MGIPRRND—See. II [Day]—3 EC/72—29-1-73—2,500.

Fifth General Elections in India (1971-72)

Documents

Transcript of Fifth General Elections in India (1971-72)