INDERKAUR GURUCHARANSINGH RAGI Vs. HANMANTRAO SAYANNA BATTIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed on behalf of the original respondent no. 3 to challenge the order made on 16-2-1994 by the learned Additional District Judge, Nanded, in Election Petition No.7 of 1992, declaring the election of the petitioner original respondent no. 3 as Municipal Councillor as null and void and in consequence same is set-aside. Not only that but the learned Additional District Judge further held that the respondent no. 3 was guilty of corrupt practices under Section 21 (11) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (for short, the Act) and disqualified from becoming a member of the Municipal Council for a period of six years from the date of the order.

(2.) IT is important to note that the election petition is filed not by the defeated candidate but by one of the voters who is the nephew of the respondent no. 7 who contested the election alongwith the petitioner but was defeated. IT is averred in the election petition that the respondent no. 7 secured 396 votes, whereas, the petitioner secured 450 votes by playing corrupt practices. IT is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner is the member of the Gurudwara Board and also a teacher. The petitioner with anti social elements used illegal force and gave threats to the voter of Ward No.64 to vote in her favour. IT is submitted that the petitioner being the member of the Gurudwara Board was provided with security from the threats of terrorists. Her body guards used to have sten-guns who threatened the voters to vote in her favour. Moreover, it is averred that most of the voters reside within the area of the railway yard, they are very poor and they have to fight for daily bread. Their names have been included in the voters list of ward No.64 though their huts are temporary. The Petitioner gave assurance to these poor voters that she will allot them permanent plots on the land of Gurudwara Board or on the land belonging to the Municipal Council if they vote in her favour. The Petitioner further assured that she would appoint number of voters or sons/daughters in the municipal office or the Gurudwara Board. IT is further alleged that the petitioner distributed food daily from 24-12-1991 in the Railway Yard by visiting their huts in the morning as well as in the evening. She also gave number of dinners to the voters of high class society at her residence. IT is in this way that the petitioner gratified number of voters of Ward No.64. IT is, therefore, submitted that the aforesaid acts constitute corrupt practices and therefore, the election of the petitioner original respondent no. 3 was illegal.

(3.) ON going through their evidence as discussed above the learned trial Judge recorded a finding that the petitioner respondent no. 3 was guilty of corrupt practices for seeking votes as averred to in the election petition, that out of 31 votes 19 votes cast in favour of the petitioner original respondent no. 3 were bogus and that she was disqualified from contesting the election as she is employed as teacher.