IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PURNENDU SINGH, J.
CWJC No. 5501 of 2022
(29.1.2024)
Dev Narayan Sahu @ Dev Narayan Sah ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Constitution of India–Articles 243-O and 329(b) read with Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006–Section 138 & Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 2006–Rules 72, 73, 74, 76 and 79–Bar of interferences by Courts in electoral matters–in view of the bar contained in Article 243-0 (b) of the Constitution of India and the position of law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the validity of any election under the provisions of the Act of 2006 can be called in question only by way of election petition under the provisions of Section 137 of the Act of 2006 and the Rules made thereunder–it must be borne in mind that Article 243-O (b) bars the interference by Courts in matters of election to any Panchayat called in question except by way of an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of State–in the light of this provision, a distinction needs to be drawn between "an election petition presented to such authority and in such manner as is provided for by or under any law made by the Legislature of a State" and other incidental matters not provided tax in the relevant Acts and the Rules made by the State Legislature–the bar is specifically with respect to the former but the letter is not to be read as barred from any interference by the Courts where the exceptional circumstances so require–if such circumstances exist, the alternative remedy can be by-passed–in the present case, only on the recommendation of an engineer, holding of fresh election at Both No. 213 has been recommended–however, the H.C. in exercise of power of judicial review to correct the action of the District Magistrate who has in mala fide and without jurisdiction and without obtaining expert report of Bharat Electronic Ltd. With respect to working of EVM machine simply on the recommendation of an engineer has declared free-polling assessing the machine has found the machine to be defective–the matter is required to be examined on the basis of the expert scientific report of the BEL, whether, the EVM machine containing the votes cast by voters at Both No. 213 on which the petitioner was declared returned candidates–the Tribunal directed to proceed on the basis of the materials, including the objection filed by the petitioner before the Election Commission and on the basis of the Technical report of Bharat Electronic Ltd. To decide the dispute in accordance with law–the petitioner and returned candidate directed to appear before the Tribunal within one week–the question of limitation not to come in the way–writ petition disposed of. (Paras 22 to 34)
(2000)8 SCC 216, AIR 1975 SC 2140, AIR 1952 SC 64, (1975)4 SCC 822, (1982)1 SCC 691, (2019)4 SCC 500, (2009)9 SCc 310–Referred.
Purnendu Singh, J.—Heard Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, along with Mr. Awnish Kumar, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Kumar Alok, learned SC7 for the State and Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned counsel for the SEC.
2. Petitioner has filed the writ petition inter alia for following relief(s):—
(I) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent authorities to declare the election of the respondent no.7 as the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj, Gangwara Bujurg under Runnisaidpur Block of Sitamarhi District, void on the ground that for the election of respondent no.7, the respondent nos.5 and 6 had crossed all their limits when they had undertaken a re-poll in Booth No.213 of Gram Panchayat Raj, Gangwara Bujurg after the counting of votes already polled in the said booth on 12.12.2021 by altogether a different Presiding Officers and based upon said re-poll, there was a re-counting and in the said recounting, the respondent no.7 was declared elected though in view of the votes polled in all 13 booths of the said Gram Panchayat, the petitioner was winning the election by a margin of 25 votes.
(II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent nos.1,2 and 3 to deal with respondent nos.5 and 6 with iron hands since they have committed a fraud upon the democracy and the electorates residing in Gram Panchayat Raj, Gangwara Bujurg by holding a re-poll in Booth No.213 of the said Gram Panchayat and declaring the respondent no.7 as a returned candidate from the post of Mukhiya of said Gram Panchayat, otherwise, it will difficult to sustain the democracy and the democratic institution in the State of Bihar.
(III) For a declaration that though the State Election Commission has been constituted to ensure the constitution of grass root democracy by holding a free and fair election but it has miserably failed to conduct a free and fair Panchayat Election, 2021 at least in the petitioner’s gram Panchayat when it remained a silent spectator even when the fraud committed by the respondent nos.5 and 6 was duly communicated to the State Election Commission by the petitioner.
(IV) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the writ petitioner would be found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had been declared as a returned candidate in the poll held on 12.12.2021 for the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj Gangwara Bujurg, having received the largest number of total votes in favour of the petitioner is 1073 in all 13 booths, as would appear from Annexure P1, to which no objection was made by any of the participating candidates, including respondent No.7. In favour of respondent no.7, altogether 1048 votes were cast and a specific statement has been made in this regard in paragraph 9 of the writ petition.
4. Learned counsel submitted that in absence of any objection alleging that the EVM machine was malfunctioning from the candidates to the office on duty who were present at the time of casting of the vote on 12.12.2021 or its counting, the action of the respondent no. 6, who is the Returning Officer, directing for holding re-poll of booth No.213 on 15.12.2021 is illegal and biased in favor of respondent no. 7, who had secured less votes than the petitioner. On the basis of re-poll dated 15.12.2021 in booth no. 213, respondent no. 7 has been declared as returned candidate by a margin of 62 votes, which is an illegal action in absence of any objection raised and application filed by respondent no.7 for recounting of votes on 12.12.2021. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has raised specific objection in his complaint dated 18.12.2021 before the State Election Commission, Gangwara Bujurg, Gram Panchayat Sitamarhi regarding the biased actions of the respondents concern
Election Commission of India vs. Ashok Kumar
Anil Vasudev Salgaonkar vs. Naresh Kushali Shigaonkar
N.P. Punnuswami vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal
Suresh Prasad Yadav vs. Jai Prakash Mishra
The validity of the elections must be tested in election petitions under Section 176(5) of the 1994 Act.
Interference in electoral matters after results are declared is barred by Articles 243-O and 243-ZG; the appropriate recourse is through an election petition.
Election disputes must be addressed through statutory remedies, and writ petitions are not maintainable when an alternative remedy exists under the relevant election laws.
The court held that election challenges must be made through an Election Petition filed within the statutory period, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural requirements.
The election petition must contain specific grounds and a summary of circumstances justifying the questioning of the election result, complying with the provisions of the Act and rules.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.