Election

Representation of the People Act, 1951

— S. 94 — Held, per curiam, confers only a right/privilege on a witness that he would not be compelled to disclose for whom he voted — But it does not abrogate or restrict jurisdiction of court/Election Tribunal to issue summons to a voter — It is only on his appearance before court/tribunal as a witness whether on being summoned or not that the right/privilege against self-incrimination becomes available to him and then it is his volition to exercise or not to exercise his right/privilege — Prior to appearance of a person as a witness, he as a prospective witness or any other person cannot claim such right/privilege in anticipation of an apprehended breach of privilege against self-incrimination, (2006) 5 SCC 239-A

Election

Representation of the People Act, 1951

— S. 94 — Summoning of a witness to give evidence before court/Election Tribunal disclosing for whom he voted, held, per curiam, cannot be refused on ground that it would breach secrecy of the voting — Secrecy of voting can be breached to subserve a larger public interest i.e. purity of election process — Merely because a party disclosed in his application under Or. 16 R. 1 CPC that one of the purposes for obtaining the summons was to ask for whom he voted or merely because possibility existed that on court/tribunal requiring him to give evidence secrecy of voting may be infringed, court would not refuse to issue summons, (2006) 5 SCC 239-B