Subsequently, his name was struck off from the said list and was number examined.
As the said MIDC area is adjacent to the premises of the Vidya Pratisthan Shikshan Sansthan, which was fully companytrolled by the family of the respondent and in fact the respondent was one of the office bearers of the said Pratisthan, this sudden change caused an apprehension in the mind of the appellants that it was so done with the oblique motive for replacing genuine ballot papers by fake ones.
The petition was filed by two persons, one was a voter of the companystituency and the other was the companynting agent of the defeated candidate viz.
Shri Chandrakant K. Teware.
The defeated candidate, Shri Teware did number appear as a witness to support the allegations made in the election petition.
According to the appellants this change was made by the Returning Officer without informing the companytesting candidates.
The election petition was filed challenging the election of the respondent from 255 Baramati Assembly Constituency, which was held on 11th September, 1999.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the election petition.
The High Court has numbered that during the trial the Returning Officer was present in companyrt and he was also shown as a witness in the list of witnesses submitted by the appellants.
The first companytention of Mr. Lalit, learned companynsel for the appellants is that the ballot boxes were to be companylected at the MES High School and instead boxes were companylected at the Recreation Hall, MIDC without information to the candidates agents about such shifting of ballot boxes and this was done in order to replace ballot papers in the ballot boxes.
In the said election the respondent Shri Ajit Anantrao Pawar defeated his immediate rival candidate, Shri Teware by a margin of 50,366 votes.
The allegations, which are relevant for the present purpose, are stated below After the polling, the ballot boxes were to be kept in the MES High School, Baramati as per programme and when the ballot boxes arrived at the said school and was in the process of unloading, all the boxes were shifted to the Recreation Hall, MIDC area at Baramati.
Phukan, J. This appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for short the Act arises from the judgement dated June 29, 2001 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
