LAWS(GAU)-1997-1-22

NAZUMAL HAQUE Vs. ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE JOTDAR

Decided On January 29, 1997
NAZMUL HAQUE Appellant
V/S
ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE JOTDAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Section 80, 80A, 8l. 100 and 101 of the Representation of People Act 1951 the petitioner, a resident of village Ambari, District Goal par a. and an elector of Assam Legislative Assembly Constituency No. 38 (Goalpara West) who was also one of the contestants in last General Election held in April, 1996 from the said LA, Constituency calls in question the election of Respondent No. 1, a Congress-I candidate, who was declared elected from the aforesaid constituency securing 5707 votes more than his nearest rival-the petitioner, who had polled 13663 votes while the respondent No, 1 polled 19370 votes.

(2.) Apart from seeking the declaration the election of Respondent No. 1 is void and illegal, the petitioner has further prayed, that he be declared elected from the aforesaid constituency. On petitioner's own showing there were in all eight contestants at the election as named by him in paragraph 5 of his petition. Out of them only one Respondent, Respondent No. 1,the returned candidate has been impleaded as a party, the seven others are not, in face of the relief - declaring the petitioner elected. The Returning Officer is respondent No. 2.

(3.) The election result was declared on 10.5.95. This petition was filed on 24.6.96. inter alia, on the ground (i) wrongful rejection and acceptance of votes and non compliance of provisions relating to counting; (ii) impersonation in several polling stations by the supporters of respondent No. 1 ; (iii) refusal to allow petitioner's agents to guard the strong room, where ballot boxes were kept - subsequently at the time of counting several ballot papers were found to be without signature of the presiding officer; (iv) large scale rigging of votes by respondent No. 1 along with his agents and supporters which materially affected the result of election in favour of respondent No. 1. On the grounds set forth above, the petitioner has not only challenged the respondents for election but also claimed and prayed for the relief of being declared elected.