Minor delays in submitting election expenses can be condoned if caused by sufficient reasons, and the impact of external factors, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, should be considered in such cases.

JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. This case exemplifies a lack of sportsmanship and electoral spirit. Instead of spending time on the social work, a doctor by profession is spending time on the litigation. Even after the two competent authorities gave their verdict, he dragged the public-elected members of the Village Panchayat to the High Court. That shows the changing shape of Indian democracy. No one leaves a single stone unturned. The politicians take pride in showing each other down. The politicians appear to have diverted from their primary responsibility to ensure public administration is conducted impartially and neutrally. They also appear to have forgotten that the quality of a good politician is a vision and the power to implement that vision. They are supposed to take the state forward, make the commoner's life easy and comfortable, and educate people. Not only this, but the parties to the petition tried to involve the government machinery to prove that they were and were not in a position to submit statements of election expenses within the time prescribed by the election commissioner.

3. The election of the Village Panchayat was declared on 18.01.2021. Admittedly, the elected members/contesting respondents had submitted their accounts on 17.02.2021. However, the affidavit, as required to be submitted with the statement of election expenses, was sworn in on 18.02.2021 and submitted to the office on 22.02.2021. Fortunately, both parties agree that on 19.02.2021, there was Shiv Jayanti. On 20.02.2021, it was Saturday, and on 21.02.2021, it was a Sunday. Therefore, the office was closed.

4. The complaints of the petitioners before the Collector as well as the appeal before the Additional Commissioner, have been dismissed.

5. The contesting respondents, nos.1, 2, 3 and 5, explained that they were under treatment for Gastroenteritis from 16.02.2021 to 18.02.2021. Respondents nos.2 to 6 explained that they were suffering from Covid-19. They were found to have an antigen test positive on 03.02.2021. At that time, the Covid-19 pandemic was at its peak. Therefore, they were quarantined at home for 14 days. However, they could manage to swear in an affidavit on 18.02.2021. Soon after the office opened on 22.02.2021, they submitted it. They have also produced the medical certificate against the documents produced by the petitioners, showing that the allegations against them are false. Respondents nos.4 and 6 have submitted the Covid-19 test report from ICMR as against the certificate of non-examination of respondent nos.4 to 6 from the hospital of the Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar. The petitioners have also placed on record the discharge certificate of respondent No. 1 Mangal of Bhairawnath Hospital. Referring to these documents, it has been vehemently argued that when she was discharged on 19.02.2021, how could she swear in an affidavit on 18.02.2021? Similar are the arguments against respondent nos.2, 3 and 5. The certificate of Dr. Mayur Chauhan, BHMS, dated 29.07.2021, has also been placed on record. He certified that on 03.02.2021, he did not treat her as she was Covid-19 positive. She and her relatives produced a forged prescription from his hospital. The prescription does not bear his signature. The petitioners did not stop there; they went on calling the information under the Right to Information Act about respondents Rupali and Kavita and obtained the information that their report of COVID-19 positive dated 03.02.2021 was not available on the website covid.nhp.gov.in.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the explanation for the delay was not convincing and acceptable. Neither the District Collector nor the Additional Commissioner commented on these crucial questions. The Collector had decided the petition recording the observations in two lines. The Additional Commissioner also did not apply his mind and mechanically accep