RAM CHAND BHATIA vs HARDYAL

The Supreme Court held that under Section 79(b) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, a candidate can only be impleaded as a necessary party in an election petition if the charge of corrupt practice is made against them post-nomination. The Court clarified that Section 123 does not infringe on free speech but sets conditions for candidacy. The onus of proof for establishing corrupt practices lies with the election petitioner, who must demonstrate that false statements were made by the candidate or with their consent. The Court allowed the appeal, overturning the lower court's decision that had declared the election void due to alleged corrupt practices.