B DANDAPANI PATRO Vs. BIKRAM KESHARI ARUKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this ELPET with a prayer to declare the election of the respondent to the Orissa Legislative Assembly, from the single member, Bhanjanagar Constituency No. 66 as void.

(2.) As per the petition, the petitioner was a candidate on behalf of the Congress-I party in the last General election, 2004 for the Orissa Legislative Assembly from the single member, Bhanjanagar Assembly Constituency No. 66 and the respondent who was declared elected was a Biju Janata Dal candidate. There was no other candidate.

(3.) On 28-2-2004 notification was published inviting objection, if any for correction of the existing Electoral Roll prepared for election of the Assembly constituted in January 2000. Another notification was published on 24-3-2004 for holding election to the Orissa Legislative Assembly, fixing the last date for filing of nomination to 31-3-2004. The petitioner and the respondent filed their respective nominations pn 29-3-2004 and 31-3-2004 respectively. On 7-4-2004 the petitioner was supplied with a copy of the Electoral Roll and to his utter surprise found names of about 14000. electors to have been struck off the existing electoral Roll, as in force at the time when the notice dated 28-2-2004 was published. The same was done without giving an opportunity of being heard to the electors whose names were struck off. So, on 7-4-2004 the petitioner made a representation to the Chief Electoral Officer against such illegal action of the Electoral Registration Officer. One Bhajaman Sahoo also made a similar representation. Again on 12-4-2004 the petitioner sent a complaint to the Chief Electoral Officer, Orissa with copy to the Election Commission, Government of India against the illegality committed by the Registering Officer. On coming to know about such representation, the Returning Officer-cum-Sub-Collector Bhanjanagar took back the Electoral Roll which was supplied to the petitioner and it was returned to him on 10-4-2004 deleting the names of two thousand electors more. During the time of election held on 20-4-2004 when some of the electors, including witnesses Nos. 1 to 4 for the petitioner, whose names were there in the finally published Electoral Roll, went to the polling station to cast their votes they were dismayed to know that their names had been scored off the Electoral Roll. The total number of votes polled, were 99968 and the petitioner was defeated by a margin of 5426 votes only. Had the names of these 14000 voters not been struck off and had they cast their votes, the petitioner would have won the election. Further, the electronic machine by which the votes were taken was tampered with at the behest of the respondent in collusion with the Returning Officer. Furthermore, it is alleged that the names of 14000 electors were deleted because of undue influence of the respondent who contested from the Biju Janata Dal, which was in power then. Under such circumstances the petitioner filed the petition to declare the election of the respondent void, as mentioned earlier.