ARJUN KAKODIYA Vs. KAMAL MARSKOLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this Election Petition under Section 80 read with Section 81 of Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1951) calling in question the election of respondent no.1 as a member of Legislative Assembly of the State of Madhya Pradesh from 114 - Barghat (S.T.) Constituency District Seoni with prayer of calling the entire relevant records and the order for re-inspection/recount of votes polled in Legislative Assembly of the State of Madhya Pradesh from 114-Barghat (S.T.) Constituency and further declaration is sought that the election of respondent no.1 may be set aside and instead the petitioner be declared as duly elected candidate.

(2.) It is undisputed that petitioner was set up as official candidate of Indian National Congress for aforesaid 114- Barghat (S.T.) District Seoni Legislative Assembly Constituency and respondent No. 1 was set up as an official candidate of the Bhartiya Janta Party for 114- Barghat (S.T.) District Seoni Legislative Assembly Constituency and other respondents were set up as official candidates for the different parties. It is also undisputed that the elections of aforesaid Assembly was held as per notified programme of Election Commission, date of polling was 25/11/2013 and date of counting and declaration of result was 8.12.2013. It is further undisputed that Shri Bharat Yadav, Collector Seoni District, Seoni was the District Election Officer and Shri K.C. Parte was appointed as Returning Officer and Sub Divisional Officer (Agriculture) Seoni was appointed as Officer In-charge for postal ballots pertaining to 114- Barghat (S.T.) District Seoni, Legislative Assembly Constituency.

(3.) Petitioner's case, in short, is that District Election Officer and Returning Officer have been under the influence of ruling party in the State (BJP) because apparent when at every step of counting of votes on 8.12.2013 they violated the model code of conduct. Petitioner continuously raised objections before the competent authorities, ultimately on the end of counting, the petitioner made an objection/application for recounting of votes in writing on 8.12.2013 at 7.00 pm before the District Election Officer, Seoni District, Seoni. A copy of the same has been received by the Returning Officer 114- Barghat (S.T.) District Seoni Legislative Assembly Constituency regarding recounting of votes and postal ballots. But due to influence of ruling party recounting has not been conducted. Petitioner has raised major abnormality in counting of postal ballots but the District Election Officer and the Returning Officer rejected the same vide order dated 8.12.2013 at frivolous and false grounds and reasons.