P. C. PURUSHOTHAMA REDDIAR vs S. PERUMAL

The Supreme Court held that the incurring or authorizing of expenditure in contravention of Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 constitutes a single corrupt practice under Section 123(6). The Court ruled that the Trial Court erred in treating each item of expenditure as a separate corrupt practice. The appellant successfully proved that the respondent exceeded the prescribed expenditure limit by holding additional meetings, thus establishing corrupt practices. The police reports were deemed admissible as they were marked without objection, leading to the allowance of the appeal and the invalidation of the respondent's election.