KRIPA SHANKAR CHATTERJI Vs. GURUDAS CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated February 3, 1994 passed by Patna High Court (Ranchi Bench) in Election Petition No. 3 of 1990. The appellant challenged the result of the election of 285 Nirsa Assembly Constituency in the State of Bihar held in February, 1990 by presenting an election petition before the High Court under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Representation Act). The appellant Sri Kripa Shankar Chatterjee was a candidate for the said election from Nirsa Constituency. He, however, lost to the returned candidate namely Respondent No. 1 Gurudas Chatterjee by margin of 1450 votes. There were 22 other candidates contesting for the said Nirsa Constituency.

(2.) It may be stated here that during the pendency of the Election Petition before the Ranchi Bench, the election-petitioner moved an application in the High Court for inspection of ballot papers but such application being dismissed the petitioner moved a Special Leave Application before this Court but the said petition was also dismissed by this Court with the observation that dismissal of special leave petition would not preclude the High Court from inspecting the ballot papers if it deemed necessary to satisfy the Court's conscience. Although the petitioner thereafter made prayer for such inspection but the High Court did not accede to such prayer.

(3.) The election result was challenged inter alia on the grounds of (i) improper rejection of the nomination paper of one of the candidates Sri Chunmun Singh although he was above 25 years of age, (2) improper acceptance of nomination papers of two candidates namely Sri Sanjib Baxi and Sri Shivlal Manjni who were not voters in the Nirsa Assembly Constituency, (3) the returned candidates and two other candidates namely Respondent Nos. 20 and 21 were at the time of election employees of Eastern Coal Fields Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. which was a Government of India Undertaking and as such public servants under Section 21 of Indian Penal Code and accordingly were disqualified to contest the said election, and (4) the election of returned candidate was invalid on account of irregularities in counting ballot papers, particulars of such irregularities being mentioned in paragraph 30 of Election Petition.