PRATAP SINGH vs RAJINDER SINGH & ANR.

The Supreme Court emphasized that in election cases, the High Court's appreciation of oral evidence is not easily disturbed unless serious infirmities are overlooked or evidence is misread. The Court reiterated that charges of corrupt practice must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and the High Court's mechanical acceptance of evidence without rigorous scrutiny was inadequate. The judgment in Rahim Khan v. Khurshid Ahmed was followed, reinforcing the need for a strict standard of proof in such cases, leading to the conclusion that the High Court's decision was flawed and required intervention.