420 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Use of Agents at General Elections
Dr. Ambedkar’s Plea.
“Anything which causes a disturbing effect on the minds of voters amounts to undue influence and interference. If a candidate carries on propaganda to frighten voters then he has caused interference and obviously disturbed the minds of voters. If he conceals an important point of law from the electorate he commits a fraud on voters or brings about undue influence on them. And to tell voters to act contrary to the electoral law is corrupt practice.
There were some of the points of law Dr. B. R. Ambedkar submitted to the Election Tribunal, composed of Mr. N. J. Wadia, Chairman, Mr. M. K. Lalkaka, and Mr. G. P. Murdeshwar at the resumed hearing of his petition and that of the Socialist Leader, Mr. Ashoka Mehta, complaining of malpractices at the last General Elections from the Bombay City North Constituency, on Friday.
Dr. Ambedkar, who appeared in person, argued at length on the question of agency at elections and touched on propaganda some of the candidates had made through newspapers and pamphlets and went on to prove that those publications had amounted to undue influence with particular reference to Section
123 (2) of the Representation of the People’s Act.
UNDUE INTERFERENCE
He pointed out the difference between the English and the Indian law and said that the former particularised undue interference while the latter only used the word in a general sense.
He referred to the statements published by and on behalf of Mr. S. A. Dange, the Communist candidate, and Dr. G. V. Deshmukh, the Independent candidate, and said that by asking voters to cast both their votes in favour of one candidate they had caused undue influence on them. One of the four witnesses previously examined had admitted that Mr. Dange knew that the Left United Front which supported his candidature to Parliamentary seat, had issued leaflets, but at no stage had he intervened and asked the Front to stop the issuing of the leaflets, he said.
The petitioner contended that Mr. Dange was responsible for his agents’ doings. The Ugantar, a Marathi weekly, had in an