KALPANA Vs. AKHTAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4 is taken on record. With the consent of parties, the writ petition is heard and decided at the admission stage itself.

(2.) The facts of the case in brief as follows:-

(3.) Petitioner filed an Election Petition against respondent No.4 i.e. Mohd. Sarfaraj, who was elected as Gram Pradhan in the election held in the year 2014, which was registered as Election Petition No. 2 of 2014 in the Court of learned Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Officer, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. On 212.2017, petitioner filed an application seeking permission to amend the Election Petition, which was allowed by the Prescribed Authority/Sub Divisional Officer, Kashipur, vide order dated 08.01.2018. The respondent No. 4, who is the returned candidate, unconditionally filed additional written statement to the amended Election Petition on 09.01.2018. Thereafter, on 10.01.2018, issues were framed and on 11.01.2018, statement of petitioner (PW1) was recorded. Petitioner moved an application seeking permission to lead evidence, which was allowed on 11.01.2018 fixing 15.01.2018. On 15.01.2018, respondent no. 4 moved an application seeking adjournment, the same was allowed and the matter was posted for 17.01.2018 for crossexamination of the petitioner. Since, the Presiding Officer was not available on 17.01.2018, the case was adjourned to 18.01.2018, on which date petitioner was crossexamined by respondent no.4. Thereafter, on the next date i.e. 20.01.2018, respondent no.4 filed his affidavit of examination-in-chief and the case was fixed for crossexamination on 201.2018, on which date the respondent no.4 as well as his witness Smt. Jehra Begam were cross-examined. The matter was fixed on 30.01.2018 for remaining evidence of respondent no.4. On 30.01.2018, the Returning Officer filed affidavit of examination-in-chief and the case was adjourned to 07.02.2018, on which date, the Returning Officer was cross-examined. Thereafter on 09.02.2018, respondent no.3 sought time to lead evidence and the matter was fixed for 17.02.2018.