T H MUSTHAFFA Vs. M P VARGHESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Elections were held on April 27, 1996 to the Kerala Legislative Assembly. The appellant and respondents Nos. 1 to 19 contested in the said election from Kunnathunadu No. 78 Assembly Constituency. Counting took place on May 8 and 9, 1996. Appellant secured 49,974 votes, while respondent No. 1 secured 50,034 votes. Thus respondent No. 1 was declared elected by a margin of 60 votes. Before the declaration of the result the appellant made an application for recount on several grounds. The Returning Officer rejected the said application. The appellant filed another application styled as "Review Application" which was also rejected. The appellant, thereafter, filed an Election Petition before the High Court of Kerala. The High Court dismissed the said Election Petition. Hence, this appeal.

(2.) The principal allegations raised by the appellant in the Election Petition are as follows:-

(3.) Respondent No. 1 in the written statement raised certain preliminary points as to non-compliance of S. 81(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the R.P. Act'). He also raised objections as to the manner in which the signature has been put and the verification made in the petition in violation of S. 83(1) and (2) of the R.P. Act. He contended that the entire counting process had been conducted legally, regularly and correctly. He denied the allegation that the Counting Supervisor and the Counting Assistants were pro-left minded and indulged in manipulations. He contended that the facilities provided in the Counting Centres were adequate with full opportunity to the counting agents of the candidates to observe or scrupulously watch the scrutiny of the ballot papers. He claimed that the ballot papers in favour of the candidates were accurately bundled with 25 ballots in each of the bundles and not even a single ballot paper of the appellant was bundled with that of the respondent. He contended that test checking had been done by the Returning Officer in accordance with the instructions in the Hand Book. He asserted that there was no impersonation in voting, or any of them had voted twice either in Kunnathunada Constituency or elsewhere.