Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bharat vs M.P. State Election Commission on 13 July, 2022
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 13th OF JULY, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 16020 of 2022
Between:-
1. BHARAT S/O BADA , AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST VILLAGE
UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA DISTRICT
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. RETAM S/O BHIMSINGH , AGED ABOUT 31
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE R/O
VILLAGE UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. KAMLA W/O RASU , AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O VILLGE
UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. SHARMILA D/O KALAM CHAREL , AGED ABOUT
26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL R/O VILLGE
UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. RAKESH S/O MITHU SINGH , AGED ABOUT 35
YE A R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST R/O
VILLAGE UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. KANKU W/O GOUTAM , AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O VILLAGE
UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
7. RADHA W/O PARSINGH JHALA , AGED ABOUT
23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O
VILLAGE UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. SANGI W/O BHOWAN , AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O VILLAGE
UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA (MADHYA
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.07.14
10:38:42 IST
PRADESH)
2
9. SMT. HIRA W/O GENDALAL DAMAR , AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE
R/O VILLAGE UDAYGANJ TEHSIL THANDLA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI AKASH RATHI, LEARNED COUNSEL)
AND
1. M.P. STATE ELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH
STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER 58 ARERA
HILLS BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER JHABUA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. RETURING OFFICER BOOTH NO. 14 GRAM
PANCHAYT CHAYAN TEHSIL THANDLA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI KAMAL NAYAN AIREN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENTS)
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition is filed by the petitioners No.1-8, who are voters and
by the petitioner No.9, who is a candidate for the post of Sarpanch for the
Gram Panchayat Chayan, Tehsil - Thandla, Dist. Jhabua.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that due to disturbance created by
some miscreants, the petitioners No.1-8 could not exercise their right to vote
and, therefore, a direction has been prayed for re-poll of the booth No. 14.
Counsel for the respondents has filed reply and raised preliminary
objection regarding maintainability of the present petition on the ground that
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.07.14
once the election has been notified, the writ petition is not maintainable and the
10:38:42 IST
remedy of the petitioner is to file election petition under Section 122 of Madhya
Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the rules
made therein. It is further submitted that the petitioner No.9 had applied for
recounting of votes on 29.06.2022 and not on the date of the counting of vote
that was on 25.06.2022. It is further submitted that the complaint of the
petitioner dated 29.06.2022 has been decided by the Returning Officer. Report
was called from the Presiding Officer in which he is mentioned that no such
application was given by the petitioner on the polling date and the polling was
around 85%. The polling agent of the petitioner No.9 remained present during
the voting and the final result-sheet has been signed by him. He has filed
relevant documents along with the reply. It is further submitted that the
objection of the petitioner has been decided in view of the Rule 77(2) and 80(4)
(5) of Madhya Pradesh Election Rules 1995 and also Clause 21.22 and 21.23 of
the R.O. Handbook.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the application
filed by the petitioner for recounting has been decided by the respondent. Thus,
the grievance raised in the petition has been redressed. There is no challenge to
the order of rejection of application for recounting in the writ petition. Further
disputed question of facts are involved in the present case viz. there is not
receiving of the application for recounting submitted by the petitioner before the
Presiding Officer which are to be adjudicated by recording of the evidence
which can only be done in the election petition. The writ petition is not
maintainable. The results are to be declared on 14.07.2022. A coordinate Bench
at Jabalpur in the case of Smt. Savitribai vs. State Election Commission
(W.P. No.14728/2022) has dismissed the petition for recount of votes after
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.07.14
10:38:42 IST taking into consideration the various judgments passed by the apex Court in the
case of R. Narayanan vs. S. Semmalai and others - (1980) 2 SCC 537,
Vadivelu v. Sundaram and others - (2000) 8 SCC 355 and Bhabhi vs. Sheo
Govind and others - (1976) 1 SCC 687.
After considering the aforesaid judgments, the coordinate Bench held that
the recounting of ballot papers can be considered only if it is accompanied by
genuine cause supported by valid reasons. Recounting of votes cannot be
directed just at the sweet will of the candidate. The secrecy of a vote is to be
maintained and unless and until, a genuine cause supported by valid reasons is
made out, recounting of votes cannot be directed. The disputed question of
facts are involved which cannot be adjudicated in the writ petition. The
petitioner has an efficacious remedy of filing election petition in accordance
with the law.
Accordingly, no case is made out for entertaining this petition. The
petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
soumya
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.07.14
10:38:42 IST
