IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 01.03.2025 Alka Yadav ....Petitioner VERSUS Sushma ....Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present : Mr. Vinay Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rakesh Dhiman, Advocate for the respondent.

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)

1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 14.02.2025 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for leading additional evidence has been dismissed by the Election Tribunal.

2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the petitioner herein has challenged the election of the respondent as Sarpanch of village Mohammadpur Ahir, Tehsil Tauru, District Nuh vide Election Petition No.8 of 2022. During the pendency of the election petition, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing CR-6043-2023 for expeditious disposal of the election petition averring therein that the respondent was using delaying tactics and the case was being adjourned from time to time. Vide order dated 12.12.2023 the said revision petition was disposed off with a direction that the election petition be decided within a period of 09 months. Subsequently, extension was sought by the Election Tribunal, which was granted vide order dated 27.09.2024 once again directing that the matter be disposed off within a period of 03 months. Yet again a request for extension was sent by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nuh, which was allowed vide order dated 20.01.2025 and one final extension for a period of 02 months was granted for disposing off the election petition. The petitioner during her evidence summoned election records for the post of Sarpanch of village Mohammadpur Ahir, village Dadu and two other villages, namely Jafrabad and Jalalpur Sohna (Kharak), Tehsil Tauru and three witnesses i.e. PW6, PW7 and PW8 were examined by her in this regard. PW6 brought the record of Booth No.26 to Booth No.29 in a sealed cover, which was opened on the direction of the Court concerned and were marked as PW6/A to PW6/E. On the same day i.e. 18.10.2024, PW7 appeared and the record brought by the said witness qua Booth No.12 was opened and exhibited. PW8 also appeared on 18.10.2024 and brought the record, which was opened and exhibited. In February 2025 when the case was at the stage of rebuttal evidence, if any, and arguments, an application was filed by the petitioner for leading additional evidence. In the said application it has been stated that the petitioner had obtained copies of the record of the election produced by the said witnesses for preparing final arguments and it had come to the notice of the petitioner that the Register of Voters Annexure-1 of EVM Order 2008 in respect of the said election for the post of Sarpanch of village Mohammadpur Ahir and village Dadu and also village Jafrabad had not been brought by the said witnesses and the same were not found in the said packets tendered before the Court. It was further stated that the Register of Voters Annexure-1 of EVM Order 2008 in respect of the election of Sarpanch of village Mohammadpur Ahir, village Dadu and also of village Jafrabad were necessary for proper and effective decision of the case and prayed that PW6 and PW7 may be summoned to produce the registers. Reply was filed to the said application and vide the impugned order dated 14.02.2025 the application was dismissed. Hence, the present revision petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that PW6 and PW7 had not brought the Register of Voters and that the record was brought in a sealed cover and the petitioner was not aware of the same till she applied for copies for preparing the case for final arguments and it is only at that stage that she came to know that the Register of Voters had not been produced by the witnesses and hence was compelled to file the application for additional evidence. It is further the contention that