Swarajya, September 5, 1964
Between ourselves, honest voter, these private monopolies created by the pernicious system of permits, licences, quotas and controls (to be extended now even to foreign capital which voluntarily comes into the private sector) make the Congress Party's rich friends richer, and the poor poorer. It is a close conspiracy; we have a battle between money and liberty, between dharma and atheism, between freedom and communism clothed in Congress robes.
Sri N. Dandekar who contested the Gonda (UP) seat in the Lok Sabha as a Swatantra Party candidate was on first count found to have obtained a majority of votes. At the instance of the contesting Congress candidate (Sri Ram Ratan Gupta, the big industrialist and congressman of Kanpur), a recount was ordered and Sri Gupta was declared elected by a majority of votes. On appeal by Sri Dandekar, the one-man Election Tribunal (a retired High Court Judge) has now found, after one of the most interesting and longest enquiries in election history that the Congress candidate Sri Gupta tampered with the ballot boxes between the first and second counting and thereby more than two thousand of the votes which had been cast for Sri Dandekar were found invalid at the re-count by reason of double stamps put on them. The Tribunal has set aside Sri Ram Ratan Gupta’s election and declared Sri Dandekar elected. It has given a finding not only about the misconduct of the Congress candidate but also about the active connivance of the officials in charge of the ballot boxes.
The judgment throws a lurid light on the conduct of a powerful, wealthy and important Congress candidate and of the officials concerned. Sri Dandekar has not only won his seat; he has inflicted a well-deserved blow on the prestige of the ruling party from which it would be hard for it to recover. The Returning Officer (Mr. C. M. Nigam), the Tribunal found, “was instrumental in bringing about the success of Mr. Gupta by corrupt contrivance and the quid pro quo was his promotion as Commissioner of Faizabad Division in November 1962 after the election, although he had been previously superseded.” Sri Dandekar fought well and won this battle for honesty. It was not merely an appeal in respect of a Parliament seat. The exposure of the crime was complete. It involved great, painstaking and patient effort to bring this about. The Congress candidate has been disgraced and defeated and Sri Dandekar has recovered his seat. But a duly elected Member of Parliament was by criminal practices effectively kept out of his seat for two-and-half years. No compensation can make up for this crime.
The Congress Party leaders must hide their heads in shame instead of talking about improving the morality of the people through terrorizing the timid and the vulnerable section of the community. Evasion of heavy taxes is no doubt illegal. But tampering with the seals of ballot-boxes and defacing the ballot papers contained in them to invalidate a lawful election and obtain a seat in Parliament is a disgraceful crime worthy of being classified with burglary and rape.
If Government officials of the rank of District Collectors and Commissioners of a Division could be induced to give active assistance to such a crime, one can draw inferences as to the level of character to which the Congress hegemony has brought down the administration in the UP State. Lavish expenditure, entertainment and provision of transport for voters in violation of legal provisions, these have become common enough. Purchase of blocks of votes through local commandoes has become a regular practice. The courage for direct purchase of individual votes has also been acquired through the power the ruling party commands; policemen have learnt to look on and take no notice, for it is not a “cognizable” offence. We have seen the Opposing candidates bought off on the eve of scrutiny and the Congress candidate declared elected unopposed and the performance rewarded with high office. But tampering with the ballot papers in the “sealed” boxes was not exposed as it has been done in this case. The call for recount was made of course on the basis of confidence that such tampering could be executed in the interval. Sri Dandekar was unjustly kept out of his seat for half the term for which he was elected, but perhaps the exposure in this case was worth paying that price.
