HARCHARAN SINGH BRAR Vs. SUKHDARSHAN SINGH AND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2003-7-182
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on
July 11,2003
Harcharan Singh Brar
Appellant
VERSUS
Sukhdarshan Singh And Ors.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
HARBANS SINGH JALAL,EX.MLA,BATHINDA V. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,NEW DELHI AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]DR. VIJAY LAXMI SADHO V. JAGDISH [REFERRED TO]
HARSH KUMAR V. BHAGWAN SAHAI RAWAT [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. PURUSHOTTAM JOG NAIK [REFERRED TO]
RANANJAYA SINGH VS. BAIJNATH SINGH [REFERRED TO]
BARIUM CHEMICALS LIMITED VS. COMPANY LAW BOARD [REFERRED TO]
SAMANT N BALKRISHNA VS. GEORGE FERNANDEZ [REFERRED TO]
JITENDRA BAHADUR SINGH VS. KIRSHNA BEHARI [REFERRED TO]
A K K NAMBIAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
NIHAL SINGH VS. RAO BIRENDRA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
HARDWARI LAL VS. KANWAL SINGH [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA KUMAR SAKLECHA VS. JAGJIWAN [REFERRED TO]
AZHAR HUSAIN VS. RAJIV GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
GAJANAN KRISHNAJI BAPAT VS. DATTAJI RAGHOBAJI MEGHE [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAKANTA GOYAL VS. SOHAN SINGH JODH SINGH KOHLI [REFERRED TO]
RAMAKANT MAYEKAR CHHAGAN BHUJBAL PRAMOD MAHAJAN BALASAHEB THACKERAY VS. CELINE DSILVA:CELINE DSILVA:CELINE D SILVA:CELINE DSILVA [REFERRED TO]
L R SHIVARAMAGOWDA VS. T M CHANDRASHEKAR [REFERRED TO]
D RAMACHANDRAN VS. R V JANAKIRAMAN [REFERRED TO]
V NARAYANASWAMY VS. C P THIRUNAVUKKARASU [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDER SINGH VS. JANMEJA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
T PHUNZATHANG VS. HANGKHANLIAN [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
S.S. Nijjar, J. -
(1.)THE elections to the Punjab Legislative Assembly were held on 7.2.1997. The term of five years was to expire on 14.2.2002. The Election Commission of India announced the Election Programme for the States of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and Manipur on 25.12.2001. Therefore, the Model Code of Conduct came into effect with effect from 25.12.2001. The Chief Election Officer, Punjab issued the programme for holding elections in all the 117 constituencies of Punjab, including 105 Muktsar Assembly Constituency. The election programme is reproduced as under: -
(1) Calling of Constituency 16.1.2002 (2) Last date for filing nomination 23.1.2002 (3) Date of Scrutiny of nomination papers 24.1.2002 (4) Last date for withdrawal of candidatures 28.1.2002 (5) Date of Polling 13,2.2002 (6) Hours of Poll 8.00 AM to 5.00 PM (7) Date of counting of votes 24.2.2002 (8) Date of declaration of result 24.2.2002
(2.)AFTER withdrawal of nomination papers, 12 candidates remained in the election contest for the Muktsar Assembly Constituency . The petitioner was a nominee of the Congress Party. Respondent No. 1 contested as independent candidate, having been denied ticket by the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). Respondent No. 2 was candidate of Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). Respondent No. 3 was candidate of B.S.P. Remaining candidates contested as independent candidates. Respondent No. 5, Jaspal Singh filed his nomination paper on 22.1.2002. Respondent No. 1, the returned candidate filed his nomination papers on 23.1.2002. The polling took place on 13.2.2002. Counting of votes took place on 24.2.2002. Respondent No. 1 was declared elected having won by a margin of 200 votes. Candidates obtained the following votes: -
Sr. Name of Candidate Name of party Votes polled No. 1. S. Harcharan Singh INC 32265 2. Harnirpal Singh SAD 26855 3. Mandar Singh BSP 2076 4. Sukhdarshan Singh (Khokhar) IND 264 5. Sukhdarshan Singh (Marar Kalan) IND 32465 6. Sukhjinder Singh IND 279 7. Sham Lal IND 140 8. Jaspal Singh IND 875 9. Pardeep Kumar IND 187 10. Manjeet Kaur IND 242 11. Mukhtiar Singh IND 470 12. Ram Kumar IND 1201 Total No. of electros : 1,39,658 Votes Polled : 97,319 Votes rejected : 39
The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No. 1 by filing this petition under Sections 80, 80A, 81 read with Sections 100 and 101 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, and perusing the pleadings of the parties, the following/issues have been framed on 25.11.2002: -
1. Whether the averments made in the election petition lacks in material facts and do not disclose any cause of action? If, so, its effect? OPR
2. Whether the affidavit filed in support of the election petition is not valid? If so, its effect? OPR
3. Whether respondent No. 1 is guilty of having committed the corrupt practice of obtaining the assistance of a police officer within the meaning of Section 123(7) of the R.P. Act as alleged in the election petition? OPP
(3.)WHETHER the nomination of respondent No. 5 was improperly accepted? IF so, its effect? OPP
(1) Calling of Constituency 16.1.2002 (2) Last date for filing nomination 23.1.2002 (3) Date of Scrutiny of nomination papers 24.1.2002 (4) Last date for withdrawal of candidatures 28.1.2002 (5) Date of Polling 13,2.2002 (6) Hours of Poll 8.00 AM to 5.00 PM (7) Date of counting of votes 24.2.2002 (8) Date of declaration of result 24.2.2002
(2.)AFTER withdrawal of nomination papers, 12 candidates remained in the election contest for the Muktsar Assembly Constituency . The petitioner was a nominee of the Congress Party. Respondent No. 1 contested as independent candidate, having been denied ticket by the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). Respondent No. 2 was candidate of Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). Respondent No. 3 was candidate of B.S.P. Remaining candidates contested as independent candidates. Respondent No. 5, Jaspal Singh filed his nomination paper on 22.1.2002. Respondent No. 1, the returned candidate filed his nomination papers on 23.1.2002. The polling took place on 13.2.2002. Counting of votes took place on 24.2.2002. Respondent No. 1 was declared elected having won by a margin of 200 votes. Candidates obtained the following votes: -
Sr. Name of Candidate Name of party Votes polled No. 1. S. Harcharan Singh INC 32265 2. Harnirpal Singh SAD 26855 3. Mandar Singh BSP 2076 4. Sukhdarshan Singh (Khokhar) IND 264 5. Sukhdarshan Singh (Marar Kalan) IND 32465 6. Sukhjinder Singh IND 279 7. Sham Lal IND 140 8. Jaspal Singh IND 875 9. Pardeep Kumar IND 187 10. Manjeet Kaur IND 242 11. Mukhtiar Singh IND 470 12. Ram Kumar IND 1201 Total No. of electros : 1,39,658 Votes Polled : 97,319 Votes rejected : 39
The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent No. 1 by filing this petition under Sections 80, 80A, 81 read with Sections 100 and 101 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, and perusing the pleadings of the parties, the following/issues have been framed on 25.11.2002: -
1. Whether the averments made in the election petition lacks in material facts and do not disclose any cause of action? If, so, its effect? OPR
2. Whether the affidavit filed in support of the election petition is not valid? If so, its effect? OPR
3. Whether respondent No. 1 is guilty of having committed the corrupt practice of obtaining the assistance of a police officer within the meaning of Section 123(7) of the R.P. Act as alleged in the election petition? OPP
(3.)WHETHER the nomination of respondent No. 5 was improperly accepted? IF so, its effect? OPP
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.