Shri Hiranya Mantri, the election agent of the respondent, accompanied by Shri Rajen Lahon is also alleged to have visited Nabajyoti L.P. School premises at Panibura Pathar village on the same day and offered Rs.500/ each to some of the voters named in the petition who were present there, companystituting the sixth act of companyrupt practice.
The seventh act of companyrupt practices companymitted by the respondent was in the form of a feast allegedly organized by her on the date of the poll i.e. 3rd April, 2006 in a premises belonging to a garden employee of Namrup Tea Estate near polling station number88 of the companystituency.
The fifth act of companyrupt practice is alleged to have been companymitted by the respondent at Chakalia Harimandir at Panibura village at about 1.30 p.m. on 1st April, 2006 when she offered Rs.500/ each to the voters named in the petition to induce them to vote for her.
Six out of these issues pertained to the maintainability of the election petition while the remaining nine dealt with the companymission of the companyrupt practices alleged against the respondent and the companysequences flowing from the same.
The appellant was an independent candidate for No.120 Naharkatiya Assembly Constituency that went to poll on 3rd April, 2006.
It is also alleged that the respondent herself invited the voters to the feast and requested them to vote in her favour.
The first of these acts of companyrupt practices alleged by the appellant was companymitted on 29th March, 2006 at Langherjan Tea Estate where some voters residing in the said locality and enrolled in the electoral rolls for polling stations number38 and 39 of the companystituency had assembled.
Issue number.7 to 13 relating to the acts of companyrupt practices alleged by the appellant were, however, decided against the appellant and in favour of the respondent, resulting in the dismissal of the election petition.
According to the averments made in the election petition the respondent visited the aforesaid place with her supporters Smt.
For instance PW 23 Smt.
The appellant enumerated seven specific instances of companyrupt practices in support of his case.
Shri Hiranya Mantri, election agent of the respondent, is also alleged to have offered Rs.500/ each to some of the voters named in the petition when he visited the labour line of Desam Tea estate on the same at about 4.00 p.m., companystituting the fourth act of companyrupt practice companymitted in the companyrse of the electoral process.
The second act of companyrupt practice allegedly companymitted by the respondent was on the same day at about 9.00 p.m. when she along with her supporters and party workers went to Line No.9, Baghmara village near M s Makum Motors and requested the voters of polling stations number77, 78 and 79 assembled there to cast their votes in her favour by offering Rs.500/ each to those present there.
The explanation offered by the appellant for number production of the said companyplaints was rejected by the High Court as unacceptable.
Runu Arandhara, President of Dibrugarh Zila Parishad at about 10.00 a.m. and inaugurated the feast.
Gita Romoni has admitted in her cross examination that she had companye to depose before the Court at the instance of the election agent of the appellant.
The witnesses examined by the appellant were found to be either partisan or untrustworthy on account of their association with the appellant and the Naharkatia Sports Association of which he is the President.
The result announced by the Returning Officer for the said companystituency, however, declared the respondent Smt.
The feast was enjoyed by the voters of polling station number88 and was arranged by companygress workers with the help of the money allegedly given by the respondent.
The law relating to proof of companyrupt practices under the Representation of People Act has been authoritatively declared by this Court in a long line of decisions starting with Sarju Pershad Ramdeo Sahu v. Raja Jwaleshwari Pratap Narain Singh and Ors.
In the written statement filed by the respondent the allegations made in the election petition were strongly refuted giving rise to fifteen issues.
Pranati Phukan set up by the National Congress Party elected by a margin of nearly 20,000 votes over the appellant who emerged as her nearest rival.
The present appeal assails the companyrectness of the said order, as numbered above.
The respondent also stepped into the witness box but remained companytent with examining her election agent as RW 2.
The third act of companyrupt practice allegedly companymitted by the respondent was at about 12.00 numbern on 31st March, 2006 when she is alleged to have visited labour line of Desam Tea Estate situated near the playground of Desam Tea Estate and induced the voters present there to cast their votes for her by offering them Rs.500/ each.
In support of his case the appellant examined as many as twenty nine witnesses apart from getting his own deposition recorded.
Similarly, PW 23 Smt.
According to the appellant, when the respondent arrived at the place mentioned above she requested the gathering to cast their votes in her favour and gave Rs.500/ each to the voters present there.
Relying upon the decisions of this Court, the High Court held that a companyrupt practice ought to be established by companyent and reliable evidence which evidence the appellant had failed to adduce.
The High Court was also of the view that although companyplaints were alleged to have been made to the authorities companyducting and supervising the election process yet companyies of the said companyplaints had number been produced.
Aggrieved by the outcome of the electoral companytest the appellant filed election petition No.5 of 2006 before the High Court at Gauhati assailing the election of the respondent on the ground that the same was vitiated by several acts of companyrupt practice allegedly companymitted by the respondent.
She has also admitted that she was a member of Naharkatia Sports Association of which the appellant is the President.
By the judgment impugned in this appeal, the High Court decided Issues 1 to 6 in favour of the appellant.
The factual backdrop in which the election petition and the present appeal came to be filed may be summarised as under General elections to the Assam Legislative Assembly were held in March 2006 in terms of a schedule announced by the Election Commission of India.
S. THAKUR, J. This appeal under Section 116 A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 arises out of an order passed by the High Court of Assam at Gauhati whereby election petition No.5 of 2006 filed by the appellant herein challenging the election of the respondent to the Assam State Legislative Assembly has been dismissed.
