Sathi Vijay Kumar VS. Tota Singh & Others

Extract

---

Sathi Vijay Kumar VS. Tota Singh & Others

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4093 of 2004

PETITIONER: SATHI VIJAY KUMAR

RESPONDENT: TOTA SINGH & OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/12/2006

BENCH: CJI Y.K. SABHARWAL,C.K. THAKKER & R.V. RAVEENDRAN

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 5999-6000 OF 2004

C.K. THAKKER, J.

All these appeals have been instituted by the aggrieved appellants against separate orders passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.

To appreciate the issues raised in the present appeals, relevant facts may be stated in brief.

Sathi Vijay Kumar, appellant in Civil Appeal No.

4093 of 2004 was a candidate in the general election of the Punjab Constituent Assembly from 99, Moga Constituency scheduled to be held in February, 2002.

According to the appellant, the Election Commission of India issued a notification for holding election in the State of Punjab. The last date for filing nomination papers as per the programme was January 23, 2002.

The appellant filed his nomination paper as a candidate of the Indian National Congress whereas Tota Singh, respondent No.1 was the candidate set up by Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). The nomination papers were scrutinized on January 24, 2002. The last date for withdrawal of candidature was January 28, 2002. Polling took place on February 13, 2002. Votes were counted on February 24, 2002 and the results were also declared on the same day. The appellant secured 42,275 votes, while respondent No.1 secured 42,579 votes. Thus, there was a difference of 304 votes. Accordingly, the first respondent was declared as successful candidate.

On April 8, 2002, the appellant filed a petition being Election Petition No. 13 of 2002 in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh challenging the election of the first respondent, inter alia, on the ground of corrupt practice. Likewise, one Rampal Dhawan also filed a petition being Election Petition No. 4 of 2002 against the first respondent. So far as Election Petition No. 13 is concerned, the election petitioner (appellant herein) alleged that the first respondent had committed several irregularities and illegalities and at his instance, the authorities had indulged in committing such illegalities to favour the first respondent and increased chances of his being declared as returned candidate and thereby the first respondent got elected by committing corrupt practice. It is also the allegation of the election petitioner that those illegalities and irregularities had materially affected the result and the election of the returned candidate was required to be declared void under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with the Conduct of the Election Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). Similar was the case of the election petitioner in Election Petition No. 4 of 2004. He also prayed to set aside the election of the successful candidate-respondent No.1 herein.

The first respondent filed written statement, inter alia, contending that election petitions filed by the petitioners were not maintainable at law and were liable to be dismissed at the threshold. It was contended that necessary parties who were required to be joined in the election petitions were not joined inasmuch as Brijinder Singh had filed nomination form which had been scrutinized and had been accepted after such scrutiny had not been joined as party respondent. In absence of Brijinder Singh in the election petition as one of the respondents, the petitions were liable t...

See the full content of this document

---