<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1971 (1) TMI 124 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274411</link>
    <description>A corrupt practice of bribery or undue influence requires clear proof of a gift, offer, or promise made to induce electoral support, and ordinary governmental action does not become corrupt merely because it occurs near an election. On the alleged pattas, road work, nallah covering, and water-tap installation, the materials showed pre-existing administrative or public-health action supported by records, not election inducement, and the oral evidence was rejected. The leaflet and alleged defamatory oral statements were also not proved to have been published or used by the respondent or his agent. No corrupt practice was established, and the election challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:20:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (1) TMI 124 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274411</link>
      <description>A corrupt practice of bribery or undue influence requires clear proof of a gift, offer, or promise made to induce electoral support, and ordinary governmental action does not become corrupt merely because it occurs near an election. On the alleged pattas, road work, nallah covering, and water-tap installation, the materials showed pre-existing administrative or public-health action supported by records, not election inducement, and the oral evidence was rejected. The leaflet and alleged defamatory oral statements were also not proved to have been published or used by the respondent or his agent. No corrupt practice was established, and the election challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>