JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This appeal, filed under Section 116A of the
Representation of People Act, 1951 ("the Act" for short), is
directed against judgment dated August 28, 2007,
rendered by the learned Single Judge of the Gauhati High
Court in Election Petition No. 4 of 2006, by which the
prayers made by the appellant to declare the election of
the respondent No. 2, who is returned candidate from
Legislative Assembly Constituency of Dibrugarh, to be
void and to order repoll in Polling Station No. 124 Manik
Dutta L.P. School (Madhya) of 116 Dibrugarh Legislative
Assembly Constituency, are rejected.
(2.) The facts emerging from the record of the case are
as under: -
A notice was published inviting nominations from
eligible candidates to contest the Assam State Legislative
Assembly Election for 116 Dibrugarh Constituency as
required by Section 31 of the Act read with Rule 3 of the
Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, notifying the schedule
of the election, which was as under: -
1. Issue of notification 10.3.2006
2. Last date for making nomination
17.3.2006
3. Scrutiny of nomination papers 18.3.2006
4. Last date for withdrawal of candidature
20.3.2006
5. Date of poll
03.4.2006
6. Counting of votes 11.5.2006
7. Date before which election process
Shall be completed 20.5.2006
The appellant filed his nomination papers to contest
the Assam State Legislative Assembly Elections from 116
Dibrugarh Legislative Assembly Constituency as an
approved candidate of the Indian National Congress.
Along with him, the respondent No. 2 herein filed his
nomination papers as the candidate of Bhartiya Janata
Party for the said constituency. There were six other
candidates also, who were in fray and had filed their
nomination papers for contesting the said election. Upon
scrutiny of the nomination papers of the eight
candidates, papers of seven candidates including those of
the appellant and the respondent No. 2 were declared
valid by the Returning Officer. The polling took place for
the Constituency in question on April 3, 2006. It may be
mentioned that in 116 Dibrugarh Legislative Assembly
Constituency, in all there were 126 notified polling
stations, names/particulars of which were published
under Section 25 of the Act. On the date of polling one
notified polling station, i.e., Polling Station No. 124 was
not set up in the notified school, namely, Manik Dutta
L.P. School (Madhya) and instead, the polling was
conducted in another school, namely, Chiring Gaon
Railway Colony L.P. School, which was admittedly not a
notified polling station. It is not in dispute that the
polling in the said non-notified polling station started at
7.00 A.M. The case of the appellant is that as the polling
in the non-notified polling station continued up to 12.30
P.M., there was confusion and chaos amongst the voters
and many of them went away without casting their votes.
The appellant claims that his election agent lodged
complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh,
who was also the Returning Officer, for the constituency
concerned and, therefore, the polling station was shifted
to the notified school and was made functional later on.
It is necessary to mention that out of the total 1050
voters whose names were registered at the polling station
located at the school notified, 557 voters had cast their
votes, which constitute, according to the appellant,
53.8% of votes while the total polling percentage in the
entire constituency was 67.23%. The counting of the
votes for the election of the said constituency took place
on May 12, 2006 and results were declared on the same
day. The respondent No. 2 was declared elected having
polled 28,424 votes as the appellant could secure 28,249
votes out of total valid votes of 79,736. Thus the margin
of the votes between the appellant and the respondent
No. 2 was of 175 votes.
On the same day, the appellant lodged a complaint
before the Returning Officer demanding repoll at the
polling station concerned inter alia making grievance that
the shifting of the polling station from the notified area to
Chiring Gaon Railway Colony L.P. School was illegal and
deprived many voters from exercising their right of
franchise due to utter confusion and/or chaos. The
appellant also made grievance about the manner in
which the Electronic Voting Machines were shifted from
Chiring Gaon Railway Colony L.P. School to Manik Dutta
L.P. School (Madhya). In response to this complaint the
Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer,
Dibrugarh, addressed a letter dated May 20, 2006 to the
appellant mentioning that the problem about the
functioning of Polling Station notified was solved
immediately on the day of the polling under the guidance
of the Election Observer in the presence of the Zonal
Officer, Sector Officer of the Constituency Magistrate and
Polling Agents and as the complaint lodged by the
appellant was found to be an after thought, the same was
not entertained.
(3.) Thereupon, the appellant filed Election Petition No.
4 of 2006 on June 21, 2006 before the Gauhati
High Court under Sections 80, 80(A) and 81 of the
Act seeking a declaration that the election of the
respondent No. 2 from constituency concerned was
void and an order directing repolling in Polling
Station notified be made.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.