SUNITA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the State Election Commission and counsel for Smt. Radha Devi.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner in nutshell is that instead of declaring her as elected candidate the Election Commission illegally ordered a fresh date for submission of the nomination papers. The petitioner says that if the nomination papers were rightly or wrongly rejected then too the Election Commission could not interfere in the matter. According to the petitioner, the Election Commission was obliged and duty -bound to require the Returning Officer to declare the petitioner as elected candidate as the petitioner was the only candidate who had filed a valid nomination paper.

(3.) THE private respondent in return has submitted that the private respondent was kidnapped by some miscreants but because of intervention of the police and others she was freed. In the entire counter affidavit the respondent no. 5 has not stated even a single word that before 12.3.2001 (sic) i.e. the date of public petition, she ever made any complaint either to the police, Election Officer, Returning Officer or the State Election Commission that she was threatened or intimidated. It is, however, submitted during the course of the argument that a Senha was registered by the police but unfortunately the copy of the said Senha has also not been filed before this Court for its perusal. Be that as it may, the fact remains that after receiving the public petition -cum -complaint on 12.3.2002 the Election Commission referred the complaint to the District Magistrate to submit his report.