- (1.) The instant election petition has been filed on behalf of the Koche Munde (election petitioner) in terms of provisions of Section 80A, 81 and 82 read with Section 86 of Representation of the People Act, 1951, challenging the Election of the Returned Candidate Respondent No.1, Paulus Surin, who has been declared elected from 59, Torpa (S.T) Jharkhand Legislative Assembly Constituency as a member of the Jharkhand Legislative Assembly for which the election was held on 02.12.2014 and result was declared on 23.12.2014.
(2.) Election petition was filed on 04.02.2015. On 19.06.2015 notices were issued to the respondents, for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week to be served through ordinary process as well as by registered post. Rule is made returnable within six weeks. It appears from order no.8, dated 24.11.2015 despite valid service of notices upon respondent nos.1 to 4, they did not appear and therefore, order was passed to proceed the case ex-parte against respondent no.1 to 4 and last opportunity was given to the respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 to file written statement and matter was directed to be listed on 21.01.2016. Respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 appeared and time given to them to file the written statement but they did not file any written statement, so matter also proceeded ex-parte against them. On 22.01.2016, respondent no.1 appeared through his counsel by filing Vakalatnama. Thereafter, matter was directed to be listed on 19.02.2016. On 19.02.2016 an interlocutory application being I.A. No.1001/2016 was filed on behalf of the respondent no.1 to recall the order dated 24.11.2015 by which this Court passed an order to proceed ex-parte against respondent no.1 to 4. I.A. No.1001/2016 was allowed and respondent no.1 was directed to file written statement within a period of three weeks. On 08.04.2016 written statement filed on behalf of the respondent no.1 was accepted. On 17.06.2016 vide order no.14 seven issues were framed.
(3.) The case of the election petition in his plaint is as follows:- (i) That the petitioner is a citizen of India and is also a Voter having his name in part no.71, serial no.40, from 59, Torpa (S.T) Jharkhand Assembly Constituency Election, 2014. (ii) That as term of Jharkhand Legislative Assembly was going to expire on 03.01.2015, therefore, for constitution of new Legislative in the State of Jharkhand the Election Commission of India in the month of October, 2014 announced Election Programme. The Election for Jharkhand Legislative Assembly was announced to be held in 5 phases. (iii) That 59, Torpa Legislative Assembly seat is a reserved seat for Scheduled Tribe and Election was scheduled to be held in Phase-II. The Election programme for 59, Torpo (S.T.) Legislative Assembly also was announced as follows:- (iv) That the Petitioner and all Respondents including some others filed their nomination papers contesting the Election of Jharkhand Legislative Assembly for 59. TorPA (S.T.) seat. (v) That in the scrutiny nomination papers of two candidates namely (i) Jitendra Chick Baraik and (ii) Sukhram Herenj were rejected but nomination papers of the Petitioner and all Respondents including some more person/persons were found valid. (vi) That after withdrawal only eight (8) persons i.e. the Petitioner and all seven (7) Respondents remain in the field. After completion of all above and allotment of symbol voting was held by Electronic Voting Machine (E.V. Ms) on 02.12.2012 and counting of vote was held on 23.12.2012. (vii) That in the counting the Retuning Officer declared that Total Votes Polled - 103993 including 137 postal votes, postal rejected votes-38 and NOTA Votes 3828 and also declared that the candidates have secured following number of votes; (viii) That the Returning Officer -cum- Additional Collector, Khunti wrongly and illegally declared Respondent No.-1 Poulus Surin as Elected from -59, Torpa (S.T.) Jharkhand Assembly Constituency by margin of 43 Votes. (ix) That the Petitioner is challenging the election of returned candidate Respondent No.1- Poulus Surin from-59, Torpa (S.T.) Jharkhand Legislative Assembly Constituency Election- 2014 on following grounds:- (a) The nomination paper of Jitendra Chick Baraik was improperly, wrongly and illegally rejected; (b) The nomination papers (a) the returned candidates Respondent No.-1 Paulus Surin, (b) Respondent No.-3 Clementia Hemrom, (c) Respondent No.-4 Poulus Dang and (d) the Respondent No.-7 Vijay Aind were improperly, wrongly and illegally accepted by the Returning Officer, which had materially affected the result of election; (c) There has been improper reception of 69 Postal Votes in favour of the Returned Candidate Respondent No.-1 Paulus Surin and improper rejection of 38 valid Postal Votes polled in favour of the Petitioner, these have also materially affected the result of the election. (d) There has been miscounting of Postal Votes which were validly polled in favour of the Petitioner but were counted in favour of other candidates, this has also materially affected the result of the election. (e) The returned candidate- Respondent No.-1 and his Election Agent with the help of their men captured polling booths being booth numbers 58, 66, 76, 85, 103, 104, 116, 124, 125, 128, 131 132 (Total 12 Booths) and got maximum Votes polled in those booths in favour of the Returned Candidates. (f) The Election Agent of the Respondent No.-1 with consent and connivance of the Respondent No.-1 obtained several hundred illegal Votes in their favour of the Persons who were already dead. (x) That it is stated and asserted that the Petitioner has received maximum valid votes in the Election of 59, Topra (S.T.) Jharkhand Legislative Assembly Election-2014 has been illegally, wrongly declared to have lost election by 43 Votes by the Returning Officer (xi) That the Returning officer-cum-Additional Collector, Khunti worked under influence of the Dy. Commissioner, Khunti who is close relation of the returned Candidate the Respondent No.-1 Poulus Surin. (xii) That the Respondent No.-1 the returned candidate Sri Paulus Suri was a candidate of J.M.M. Party which was in power in the State of Jharkhand at the relevant time of the Election. The Respondent No.-1 in his nomination paper has disclosed about pendency of only three (3) Criminal Cases against him but has suppressed about pendency of several cases against him including:- (a) Bano P.S. Case No.-3 of 2012 which he has been charge sheeted on 23.05.2012 alongwith others under Sections 147, 148, 149, 379, and 120 (B) the Cr.P.C. This case is pending for Trial being S.T. No.-158 of 2012. (b) Govt. Appeal against his acquittal pending before this Hon'ble Court arising of his acquittal in S.T. No.-165 of 2009 arising out of G.R. No 166 of 2009 in relation to an incident of murder. The Petitioner came to know that the Respondent No.-1 was acquitted only because most of the eye witnesses/witnesses had not appeared during trial where as in fact they died unnatural death during trial. The Petitioner also came to know that in acquittal appeal notice has been issued by this Hon'ble Court to theRespondent No.-1. (xiii) That nomination papers Jitendra Chick Baraik, who has submitted his nomination for contesting the 2014 election from Torpa (S.T.) Jharkhand Legislative Assembly Constituency wrongly and illegally was rejected by Returning Officer at the time of scrutiny 15.11.2014. this illegal rejection nomination has materially affected the result of the Election. (xiv) That the Constitution (Schedule Tribes) Order 1950, Part relates State IIXX Jharkhand. The said part XXII at serial 10 contains "Chick Baraik" as Schedule Tribe Section 24 of the Bihar Reorganization Act- 2000 and its Sixth Schedule Sl. No.-10 also says "Chick Baraik" as Schedule Tribe. Therefore, rejection of nomination of Jitendra Chick Baraik on the ground that his caste certificate, which was issued S.D.O., Khunti vide Serial No.-1494 on 25.08.2006, was cancelled by Circle Officer, Torpa vide his letter dated (T)66) 29.09.2014. (xv) That ST stated and asserted that said Jitendra Chick Baraik is a "Schedule Tribe" and his nomination should not have been rejected by the Returning Officer. Said Jitendra Chick Baraik should have been given opportunity to produce materials in support of his claim. Even the certificate, which granted the Petitioner on 25.08.2006 by S.D.0., Khunti, was wrongly, illegally and in violation of rule of natural justice was cancelled by Circle Officer, Torpa, who is not superior and controlling Officer the S.D.O., Khunti. Therefore above cancellation of caste certificate Jitendra Chick Baraik by C.O. Topra was also without authority. (xvi) That the Nomination Papers of the Returning Candidate Respondent No.-1 Paulus Surin, Respondent No.-3 Clementia Hemrom"'defUl;k gej?e'" Respondent No.-4 Poulus Dang and Respondent N.-7 Vijay Aind were wrongly and illegally accepted as valid by the Returning Officer as those nomination papers were correctly and legally filled as per requirement of law. This wrong and illegal acceptance of nomination papers above candidates have materially affected the result of election. (xvii) That nomination papers the Respondent No.-1 Surin should not have been accepted Poulus and should have been rejected because in Part 'Kha' Column- 8 (iii) (Kha) has been left blank in relation wife, Dependant-1, Dependant-2 and Dependant-3. The law as well nomination form clearly states that all Column must be filled. (xviii) That the nomination papers of the Respondent No.-3 Clementia Hemrom ",'defUl;k gej?e'",who has secured 2324 Votes, should have been rejected in scrutiny by Returning Officer because she has written her name as "'defUl;k gej?e'" but singed as Clementia Hemrom. Apart from above in part "Kha" of her nomination paper there is no name of any candidate. The Column 8 (iii) part Kha) of her nomination was also not fillled. On above grounds her nomination should not have been accepted by the Returning Officer and should have been rejected. This wrong and illegal acceptance of nomination paper of the Respondent No.-3 has materially affected the result of the Election. (xix) That similarly nomination papers the Respondent No.-4 Poulus Dang should not have been accepted by the Returning Officer because several columns of his nominations were blank. The Respondent No.-4 in Part 'K' has not disclosed the name of his dependants. His nomination paper Part 'Kha' Column 8 (iii) (Kha) was also blank in relation to his Wife, Dependant-1, Dependant-2 and Dependant-3. On above ground nomination of the Respondent No.-4 should not have been accepted but should have been rejected by Returning Officer. This has also materially affected the result of the Election. (xx) That nomination paper Respondent No.-7 Vijay Aind also should not have been accepted by the Retuning Officer as he has left blank several Columns in his nomination. This has also materially affected the result of the Election. (xxi) That the Returning Officer has wrongly and illegally accepted and counted 69 Postal Votes in favour of the Returned Candidates - Respondent No.-1 Poulus Surin even though those Votes were not in conformity of rule 23 of Conduct of Election Rules 1961 and the Forms 13A, 13B and 13C were not properly and correctly filled up. The above illegal acceptance of 69 Postal Votes in favour of the Respondent No.-1 has materially affected the result of this Election. (xxii) That the Returning Officer wrongly and illegally rejected 38 Postal Votes polled in favour of the Petitioner even though those Votes were fulfilling all the requirement of law, therefore, this illegal rejection of 38 valid Postal Votes polled in favour of the Petitioner has materially affected the result of the Election. (xxiii) That Workers and polling agents of the Respondent No.1 with his consent and connivance have captured polling booths numbers 58, 66, 76, 85, 103, 104, 116, 124, 125, 128, 131 and 132 and they have not allowed all the supporters of the Petitioner to Vote. The detail of those booths are: The above act the Workers/Polling Agents/Election Agents of the Respondents has materially affected the result of the Election. (xxiv) That not only as stated above the Workers/ Polling Agents/ Election Agents the Respondent consent and connivance got polled votes of several dead persons in favour of the Respondent Poulus Surin. These illegal Votes polled in favour the Respondent No.-1, has materially affected the result of the Election. (xxv) That the Petitioner states and submits that Votes of those dead persons polled in favour the Respondent No.-1 may kindly be de- coded and then deducted from the Votes of the Respondent No.-1. (xxvi) That looking illegality in counting the Party of the Petitioner before declaration of result submitted representation to the Chief Election Commission, New Delhi with copy to Chief Election Officer, Jharkhand, District Election officer, Khunti, Observer and Returning Officer. (xxvii) That the petitioner states and submits that above void Votes polled in favour of the Respondent No.1 be deleted and his election may kindly be set aside as he has secured less valid votes than the petitioner. (xxviii) That the petitioner has received maximum Valid Votes in the polling fro 59 Torpa (S.T.) Jharkhand Assembly Election 2014 therefore he may kindly be declared Elected. ;