NINGTHOUJAM MANGI Vs. SANASAM BIRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri A. Mohendro, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Serto T. Kom, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1.

(2.) The above election petition has been filed by the petitioner questioning the declaration of the respondent No.1 as the returned candidate and the relevant prayers (b) and (c) made therein read as under:

(3.) The above election petition was filed on 25-04-2017 and the notice thereof was issued to the respondents on 28-04-2017. Notice upon respondent No.2 could not be served for some time and in the meantime, the written statement on behalf of the respondent No.1 was filed on 03-10- 2017 along with an application for condonation of delay being MC (Elect. Pet) No.21 of 2017 in filing thereof and the objection thereto was filed by the petitioner. The said application was allowed vide this Court's order dated 23-02-2018 condoning the delay on payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs. Thereafter, an application being MC (EP) No.12 of 2018 was filed by the respondent No.1 raising an issue as regards the maintainability of the election petition and the objection thereto was filed on 15-05-2018 which was heard and was thereafter dismissed by this Court on 22-01-2019 vide a reasoned judgment and order and the parties were, thereafter, directed to submit their suggested issues. In the meantime, an application being CM (Elect. Pet) No.14 of 2018 was filed by the petitioner praying for leave to file a replication and the objection thereto was filed by the respondent No.1. After hearing the counsels appearing for the parties, the application was allowed in part on 27-04-2019. Issues could be finally framed only on 26-11-2019 and the parties were directed to file their list of witnesses. Admission and denial of documents were conducted before the Registrar (Judicial) on 30-01-2020. The examination-in-chief in the form of affidavit was filed on 12-02-2020 and the petition was directed to be listed on 18- 02-2020 for recording evidence of PW-1 which was duly commenced in part. An objection was raised by the counsel for the respondent No.1 that the documents filed along with the replication cannot be taken on record. It has been submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that the said documents can be taken on record in view of some of the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. On 03-03-2020 the counsel for the respondent No.1 was granted time to go through them. Thereafter, the election petition could not be taken up further in view of COVID-19 crisis.