IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH A T J A B A L P U R BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN CIVIL REVISION No. 1110 of 2025 SHANKAR PRASAD GUPTA Versus LOVKESH SINGH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Prakash Upadhyay – Senior Advocate with Shri Harish Shukla and Shri Joyveer Singh Saini – Advocate for petitioner.

Shri Ravish Chandra Agrawal – Senior Advocate with Shri Suyash Mohan Guru and Shri Akshat Agrawal – Advocate for respondent No.1.

WITH CIVIL REVISION No. 1134 of 2025 ANITA KANJAR Versus LOVKESH SINGH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sanjay Agrawal – Senior Advocate with Shri Akshay Singh and Shri Arpit Agrawal – Advocates for petitioner.

Shri Sankalp Kochar – Advocate for respondent No.1.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AND CIVIL REVISION No. 1135 of 2025 VIDESH SINGH Versus LOVKUSH SINGH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sanjay Agrawal – Senior Advocate with Shri Akshay Singh and Shri Arpit Agrawal – Advocates for petitioner.

Shri Arpan J. Pawar – Senior Advocate with Shri Chiranjeev Sharma – Advocate for respondent No.1.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Reserved on: 21.11.2025)

(Pronounced on: 18.12.2025)

O R D E R All these three Civil Revisions arise out of common judgment passed by the Election Tribunal of First Additional District Judge, Sidhi (M.P.), whereby the election of returned candidate, who is the Revisionist in CR No.1110 of 2025, has been set aside. The said revision is thus, filed by the returned candidate whose election has been set aside. The other two Revisions have been filed by those persons who are not the returned candidates but still feel aggrieved by the said common judgment to the extent of certain comments and findings contained in the impugned judgment against them. CR No.1134 of 2025 has been filed by one of the Councillors and who was voter for the returned candidate, and aggrieved by the finding that the vote of this petitioner has been cast by her proxy in violation of Rule 11 of the M.P. Nagar Palika Adhyaksh Tatha Upadhyaksh Ka Nirvachan Niyam, 2019 (for short referred to as the “Rules of 2019”). CR No.1135 of 2025 has been filed by one Videsh Singh who was neither the contesting candidate nor the voter for the election but he is aggrieved by the findings contained in the said judgment of the Election Tribunal, wherein the finding has been recorded against him that this petitioner has entered into conspiracy and has given bribe of Rs.50,000/- each to Councillor Himanshu Tiwari and Councillor Sushila Singh, so also exerted undue influence on Councillor Govind Saket and procured votes of these three persons in favour of the returned candidate.

2. Since the issues arising for consideration of this Court in all these three Revisions are on identical facts, and same grounds have to be considered by this Court, therefore, all these three revisions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order.

3. The facts in brief for the purpose of present petitions are that in the year 2022, election for the post of Councillors as well as for the post of President in Nagar Parishad, Majhauli, District Sidhi was conducted. The election for the post of President of the said Municipal Council was indirect election and all the elected Councillors, who were 15 in number, were the voters for the post of President of the Council. The elections for the post of Councillors were conducted in July, 2022. This election of Councillors was notified on 18.07.2022 and thereafter the election notification for the post of President was issued, the voters for which were the elected Councillors. Election for the post of President was held on 10.08.2022 and in the said election, petitioner in CR No.110 of 2025 namely Shankar Prasad Gupta was declared elected candidate with majority of 8:7 votes. His election was challenged by the runner-up candidate namely Lavkesh Singh by filing