- (1.) JUDGMENT
(2.) THE challenge in this appeal by special leave is to the decision of the Guwhati High Court whereby the election of the appellant to the Nagaland Legislative assembly was declared to be void on an Election Petition having been filed by respondent No.1 who was one of the candidates in the said election. On 12-1-1993, elections to the Nagaland legislative Assembly were notified. The appellant and the respondent, along with three other candidates, contested the said elections from Dinapur Constituency No I. The result of the election for the said constituency, which was declared, was as follows: JUDGEMENT_53_4_1996Html1.htm On the counting of the votes, as the appellant had secured the highest number of votes, he was declared the returned candidate.
(3.) THE respondent then filed an Election Petition under Section 81 read with Section 100(1) (d) (iii) (iv) of the Representation of the People Act. 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Guwahati High Court. THE only ground on which the selection was challenged was that there had been improper reception of void votes which had materially affected the result of the returned candidate. Evidence was led to show that in the electoral rolls regarding the Dinapur Constituency No. 1, names of some of the voters were included in two different polling stations. In other words, there was duplication of names of some of the voters. Analysing the evidence, the High Court found that the position which emerged with regard to the reception of the said duplicate votes was as follows : JUDGEMENT_53_4_1996Html2.htm Inasmuch as the difference of votes between the returned and losing candidate was only 137 votes, the High Court came to the conclusion that 844 votes were void and that there was "no room for doubt even taking into account the demonstrable trend and pattern of voting that the election result has been materially affected by reception of void votes.";