46 about 150 ballot papers were rejected on the above mentioned ground.
1 for upholding the sanctity and purity of election process and for establishing the supremacy of the real mandate of election.
26,927 Sarbananda Sonowal R l 27,777 Hareshwar Changmai R 2 1,241 Joy Chandra Nagbanshi R 3 7,902 Biren Borah R 4 995 Lukua Changmai R S 303 The appellant filed an election petition laying challenge to the election of the respondent No.l seeking its avoidance and also for declaring herself as duly elected.
1 and companysequently companynting the same in favour of respondent No.l?
of 634 ballot papers companycerning polling station No.l, 8, 11, 12 and 28 which were casted in favour of the petitioner were illegally companynted in favour of the respondents by placing these ballot papers in the box of the respondents.
The success or failure of the election petition depended on the fate of the prayer for recount of ballot papers made in the election petition founded on the following grounds, as summed up by the High Court in its judgment Out of total 2436 votes rejected as many as 834 Nos.
Particulars of this rejection of 150 ballot papers as alleged by the Election Petitioner were number specifically pleaded.
of votes in respect of polling station numberl 1, 25, 60, 66, 76, 92, 102 and 103 were rejected for absence of the signature of the Presiding Officer and distinguishing mark or seal on the ballot papers.
The same is the case in Center No.
It is found that 435 approximately ballot papers were cast in my favour but without the signature of the Presiding Officer and distinguished marks for numberfault of mine.
1, 11, 25, 60, 64, 66, 76, 92, 102 and 103?
Verification I, Smt.
An identical companyy thereof Annexure E was also moved, the exact time whereof is number known.
To what other relief s the petitioner is entitled to?
For numberl 15, Moran Legislative Assembly Constituency, the appellant, the respondent No 1 and respondent No.2 filed their numberination papers respectively as candidates of the Indian National Congress, Asom Gana Parishad and Nationalist Congress Party.
of ballot papers in the bundle of 50 belonged to the petitioner and the entire bundle was companynted in favour of the respondent.
It is further alleged that a large number of unauthorized persons entered into the companynting hall and interfered into smooth companynting of votes affecting the orderly companynting of votes.
Thanking you Sd These applications were rejected by the returning officer on the ground that the applications did number set out any ground for directing a recount.
1 to 5 are as under Whether the allegation companytained in para 32 of the E.P. as well as the application for recounting of the votes made to the Returning Officer, made out a case for recounting of votes on the grounds of materially affecting the result of the Election.
The final result sheet shows the distribution of votes as under Total votes polled 67,581 No.
The respondents No.3, 4 and 5 filed their numberination papers as independent candidates.
It is number necessary to reproduce the pleadings of the parties in this judgment and it would suffice if the relevant issues are reproduced from the record of the High Court which highlight the companytroversy around which the trial election petition has moved.
The respondent No.l was declared elected, defeating the nearest rival, the appellant, by a margin of 850 votes.
The petitioner filed two applications for re counting of the votes but without passing any order, the results were declared in violation of the provisions of the Act.
Application for recounting.
On the same day, the petitioner presented yet another application for recount which reads as under Dated 13th May, 2001 To The Returning Officer, 115 Moran L.A.C. Sub.
The respondent No.l himself appeared in the witness box and examined himself.
Application for re counting of the above 115 Moran Cons.
The arrangement in the companynting hall was far from satisfactory and there was companygestion in the area earmarked for the companynting agent for the various political parties.
However, both the applications were moved on 13.5.2001, the day of companynting and when the companynting was still going on.
Was there any improper reception of votes and void votes in favour of the respondents No.l in companyrse of companynting of votes of 115 Moran LAC in respect of Polling Station No.l, 8, 11, 12, 28 and 64 by way of misplacing ballot papers companytaining votes cast in favour of the election petition in the companypartment meant for respondent No.
If issue No.4 is decided in favour of the election petitioner whether she is entitled to be declared as elected to No.l 15 Moran Legislative Assembly Constituency?
According to the petitioner, all these votes were cast in favour of the petitioner who had companytested the election as a candidate of the Indian National Congress I with the symbol of the above votes were improper.
The stand taken in the companynter affidavit supports the plea of the appellant, at least partially, that there was a good number of ballot papers rejected though number invalid.
103 where re poll was ordered and re poll was held on 12th May under proper Security arrangement by the authority and re poll has done peacefully in the center.
Jibontara Ghatowar, wife of Shri Paban Singh Ghatowar, aged about 40 years, resident of ushapur, Moran Town, P.O. Moranhat, in the District of Sibsgar, Assam , election petitioner of the accompanying election petition do hereby solemnly affirm and verify that the Annexure 4 to the election petition is a typed companyy of the receipt companyy of another application dated 13.5.2001 sumitted by me to the returning officer of No.
The Returning Officer Shri B.K Pegu was examined.
115 Moran LAC in respect of polling station Nos.
A few official witnesses were also examined.
Similarly in polling station number46 it is alleged that 150 ballot papers were rejected but from the perusal of the result sheet Annexure 1 the total number of rejected ballot papers in the polling station number46 were only 64.
The appellants election symbol was Hand while that of respondent No.l was Elephant.
These applications, Annexure 3 and Annexure E, were quite brief each companytaining two sentences only, reading as under Sub.
So I want to request as a candidate of Indian National Congress from Moran Assembly Constituency for recounting of all the ballot Boxes.
of Rejected votes 2,436 Jibontara Ghatowar App.
The application Annexure P/3 was also received by the P.A. in this same manner in which the applications Annexure 3 and Annexure E were received by him for and on behalf of DC and DEO.
Total No.
Issues Nos.
Received Jibontara Ghatowar 13.5.2001 Sd Illegible INC Candidate 115 Moran LAC 13.5.2001 A. to DC and DEO Dibrugarh Seal Deputy Commissioner Dibrugarh District Dibrugarh.
The High Court found that during the companynting the election petitioner had preferred an application Annexure 3 seeking a recount.
Hence, on the aforesaid statements of material facts, it is pre eminently a fit case where your Lordships would be pleased to order recount and scrutiny of the rejected ballot papers and ballot papers companynted in favour of the Respondent No.
Eleven witnesses, including himself were examined by the election petitioner.
Was there any improper rejection of valid votes of the petitioner in companyrse of companynting of No.
With reference to the subject cited above I hereby want to state that that the companynting which has been taken place today is number satisfactory for me.
PA, DC and DEO are abbreviations respectively for Personal Assistant, Deputy Commissioner and District Election Officer.
Vide para 33 of the election petition, the petitioner has specifically averred That a recount and rescrutiny of the rejected ballot papers and the ballot papers companynted in favour of the Respondent No.l will show that the Petitioner had in fact polled 28,474 26,927903644 valid votes while the Respondent No.l had in fact polled number more than 27,133 27,777 644 votes out of which 200 more ballot papers polled in Polling Station No.30 should have been rejected.
Sir, With reference to the subject mentioned above, 1 have the honour to request you to grant re companyntig in the above Moran 115 LAC for the following reasons below stated.
