https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169232 Section 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 was treated as a qualified privilege protecting a voter from compulsion to disclose the vote, not as an absolute bar against voluntary disclosure. Inspection of tampered postal ballot papers and examination of voters was permitted where the pleadings and evidence disclosed a prima facie case of alteration, and the voters could be questioned with reference to their own ballots. Proven tampering that caused improper reception and refusal of votes fell within section 100(1)(d)(iii), and the election could be set aside where the true voting intention was ascertainable from reliable evidence. en-us Fri, 09 May 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2015 10:41:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169232 Section 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 was treated as a qualified privilege protecting a voter from compulsion to disclose the vote, not as an absolute bar against voluntary disclosure. Inspection of tampered postal ballot papers and examination of voters was permitted where the pleadings and evidence disclosed a prima facie case of alteration, and the voters could be questioned with reference to their own ballots. Proven tampering that caused improper reception and refusal of votes fell within section 100(1)(d)(iii), and the election could be set aside where the true voting intention was ascertainable from reliable evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 09 May 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169232