AJIT SINGH Vs. BANSI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 15/09/1992 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Election Petition No. 15 of 1991. The aforesaid Election Petition was preferred by the appellant Shri Ajit Singh under Section 81, of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as Representation Act) inter alia praying that the election of the returned candidate Shri Bansi Singh, respondent No 1, should be declared void and the petitioner having secured the next highest score should be declared as returned from Ateli Constituency No.89 in the State of Haryana in the Vidhan Sabha Election held in 1991. For the election of the Haryana Vidhan Sabha for the year 1991, the following schedule was set up by the Election Commission :- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_758_4_1995Html1.htm</FRM>

(2.) ON account of unfortunate assassination of Shri Rajiv Gandhi on 21/05/1991, the date of counting was postponed to 16/06/1991. The polling had however been held on 20th May as per the schedule. It appears that initially 46 persons filed their nomination papers but 24 persons had drawn and the election petitioner, Shri Ajit Singh, and 20 other candidates contested the said election from Ateli Constituency No.89. The respondent No. 1, Shri Bansi Singh, having secured the highest votes as a Congress-1 candidate was declared elected from the said constituency.

(3.) AT the hearing of this appeal, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant has challenged the impugned decision of the High Court mainly on four grounds which have been indicated in the written submissions filed at the hearing of this appeal. It has been contended that admittedly the fencing was made in the hall where ballot papers were counted and the Assistants counting the ballot papers sat inside the fence but the election agents were compelled to sit outside the fence. All such election agents could not sit at the front row and many of them including the agent of the election petitioner on occasions had to sit at the back benches and there was hardly any opportunity to see the counting of votes and the rejection of invalid ballots. It has been contended that Rule 53 of the conduct of Election Rules, 1961 provides that the returning officer shall exclude from the place fixed for counting of votes all persons except