BAMBHOLA RAI Vs. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.1.2003 passed by Sub-Judge VI, Vaishali at Hajipur in Election Case No. 228/2001 whereby the amendment petition filed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 4 was allowed.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff-respondent No. 4 was that he filed nomination form for the post of Member of Panchayat Samiti of Bahrampur Gram Panchayat. The election was held on 11.4.2001. He lost the election and the defendant-petitioner was elected as Member of the Panchayat Samiti. The respondent No. 4 filed the election petition stating therein that election was held under large scale of booth capturing, firing, violence, etc. On 11.4.2001, the election of booth Nos. 74 and 75 was cancelled and re-poll was conducted. On booth Nos. 67 and 68 about 92 per cent polling was done but the Election Officer deliberately submitted wrong report due to which the Election Commission cancelled the votes polled at those booths. The respondent No. 4 claimed that he secured the highest number of votes at the aforesaid booths, i.e.; booth Nos. 67 and 68 and made a prayer in the election petition for recounting of the votes polled at booth Nos. 67 and 68 and to declare the result of the Bahrampur Panchayat Samiti taking into account the votes polled at the aforesaid booths. The defendant-petitioner filed a written statement stating therein that barring stray incidents the polling was peaceful. The votes polled at booth Nos. 67 and 68 were not taken into consideration on the report of the Election Officer. There was nothing wrong in the report. Similarly, the written statement was also filed on behalf of the defendant-respondent 1st set reiterating that there was nothing wrong in excluding the votes polled at booth Nos. 67 and 68 and declaring the result as there was a report of the Election Officer with respect to the said booths.

(3.) After filing of the written statement as indicated above, the election petition was taken up for hearing. The plaintiff-respondent No. 4 adduced evidence and his evidence was closed. The evidence of the contesting defendant-petitioner was going on. On 13.12.2002 the plaintiff-respondent No. 4 filed an application for amendment of the election petition. By the amendment the plaintiff-respondent No. 4 wanted to add booth Nos. 70 and 73 along with booth Nos. 67 and 68 for recounting. The petitioner-defendant filed rejoinder to the amendment petition stating therein that the evidence of the plaintiff has already been closed and evidence on behalf of the petitioner is going on and as such no amendment could be made at the belated stage. No reason has been assigned for such amendment. Moreover, there is no provision of amendment of the election petition under the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 1995. The witnesses of the plaintiff did not complain anything wrong at booth Nos. 70 and 73. The respondent 1st set also filed rejoinder to the amendment petition challenging the amendment stating therein that no amendment could be made in the election petition as there is no provision of amendment, and that too at the belated stage.