DEBI GHOSHAL Vs. MD ISMAIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a joint application by Respondent No. 6, buddhadeb Bhattacharyya, minister-in-charge of Information and Publicity, Govt. of West Bengal, Respondent No. 7, "mr. Jyoti Basu, Chief Minister of West Bengal, and Respondent No. 9, Hasim Abdul Halim, minister-in-Charge of the Legislative and judicial Department under Order 1 Rule 10 and -Order 6 Rule 16 of the Code of Civil procedure for striking out their names and for expunging the allegations against them from the Election Petition and other consequential reliefs including the dismissal of the Election Petition.

(2.) THE Election Petition was filed by the petitioner, Debi Ghoshal, one of the defeated candidates on the 21st of February 1980, and thereafter from time to time the matter appeard before different Learned judges and ultimately before me and directions were given for filing Written statements. During that period the present application was made on the 21st of June, 1980 and after direction for filing affidavits were given the matter came up for hearing.

(3.) THE Learned Advocate General with j. Haldar appeared for the applicants and submitted that in view of provisions of section 82 the necessary parties are specified under the Representation of People Act 1951, and no other person other than those parties specified in the said section of the said Act can be made parties to an Election Petition. He also submitted that the provisions of section 86 (4) makes it clear that any candidate who has been left out by the petitioner to be joined as a party to the Election petition, can apply before the Court within a specified time for being added as party in the Election Petition and also section (99) (1) (a) (ii) read with the proviso thereto gives ample power to the Court at the time of passing an order after the conclusion of the trial of the election petition naming a person who has been proved at the trial to have been guilty of corrupt practices and who was not, a party to the election petition, after giving him notice to show cause and after giving him an opportunity to cross examine the witness who gave evidence against him and giving him further right to call evidence in his defence. Therefore, the learned Advocate General submitted that the said Act being a complete code in itself, it provides the parties who should be joined as Respondents in the election petition filed by the petitioner and if anyone candidate is left out or any person proved to be guilty of corrupt practices, he can also be named andl brought into the proceedings, therefore the names of the persons who are not candidates cannot come under section 82 of the said Act should be struck out.