Manipur High Court
Md. Fajur Rahim vs Usham Deben Singh & 3 Ors on 27 August, 2024
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item No. 6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
El.Pet No. 23 of 2022
Md. Fajur Rahim
.....Petitioner/s
- Versus -
Usham Deben Singh & 3 Ors.
.... Respondent/s
BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 27.08.2024 [1] Present Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. N. Savitri, learned counsel on behalf of the election petitioner and Mr. Th. Tolpishak, learned counsel along with Mr. M. Rendy, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. None appeared on behalf of the other respondents. [2] On the basis of the pleadings and suggestions submitted by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court framed the following issues:
1. Whether under Section 19 of the representative of People Act, 1950, the 30 voters whose names are not included in the Electoral Roll of 36 - Wabagai Assembly Constituency who casted their votes as service voter on the basis of the service voter, materially affected the result of the election in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) and the result of the Election Page 1 in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) should to be declared as void or not?
2. Whether under Section 62(4) of the Representative Act, 1951, the names of the 111 voters of Central Government, State Government and 80+ age of the 36-
Wabagai Assembly Constituency who have casted their vote in the polling stations as well as by means of ETPBS and Postal Ballots, materially affected the result of the election in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) and the result of the Election in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) should be declared as void or not?
3. That as per the notice dated 16.02.2022 issued by the Returning Officer, the number of voters in respect of the AVSC or Senior Citizens (above 80 years of age) and AVPD or persons with disability flagged in the Database of Electoral roll are 229 numbers of 80+ and 44 numbers of PWD and whereas as per the Letter dated 28.03.2022 issued by the Returning Officer, the number of Senior Citizen (above 80 years old age) is 453 voters and PWD is 53 and as such the number of the 80+ voter has been increased from 229 voters to 453 voters and that on the PWD from 44 voters to 53 voters. The said increased votes have been casted in favour of the respondent No.
1. Whether the said increased number of voters who Page 2 have casted in favour of the respondent No. 1 has materially affected the result of the election in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) and the result of the Election in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 (Returned Candidate) should be declared as void or not?
4. Whether the result of the Election, in so far it concerns the respondent No. 1 has been materially affected by the non-compliance with the provisions of the Representative of People Act, 1951 or of any rules or orders made under this Act?
5. Is there non-disclosure of material facts, invoking Section 100 (1)(d)(iv) or non-compliance of Section 15, 17, 18 and 19 of R.P. Act, 1950, Section 83 of R.P. Act, 1951 for non-filing of separate affidavit?
6. Was there any objection from the election petitioner about the proxy votes on poll day i.e. 05.03.2022 and Result Declaration day i.e. 10.03.2022 of 36-Wabagai Assembly Constituency?
7. Was there any objection from the election petitioner about the challenging of list of service voters under 36- Wabagai Assembly Constituency?
8. Was there any objection from the election petitioner challenging the ETPBS Voters?
Page 3
9. Whether the election result of the returned candidate is null and void?
10. Whether it is a fit case to declare the election petitioner as elected member to the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly, 2022 from 36-Wabagai Assembly Constitutency?
11. Whether there is cause of action?
12. Whether the election petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed in the election petition?
[3] Parties are directed to submit list of witnesses. [4] List this case on 06.09.2024 for submission of list of witnesses, if any.
[5] On the next date, both parties may name Commissioner for affidavit.
JUDGE
Kh. Joshua Maring
Digitally signed by
KH. JOSHUA KH. JOSHUA MARING
MARING Date: 2024.08.28
10:26:10 +05'30'
Page 4