1994 (11) TMI 444 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Allegations of irregularities and illegalities during the counting process.
2. Bias and improper actions by the Returning Officer.
3. Rejection of the appellant's application for recount.
4. Preliminary objections raised by respondent No. 1 regarding maintainability of the election petition.
5. Discrepancies and tampering allegations in Form XVI and Form XX.
6. Handling and custody of election materials post-declaration of results.
7. Request for partial repoll by the appellant.
8. Contempt of court by the appellant.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Allegations of Irregularities and Illegalities During the Counting Process:
The appellant alleged that the counting process was marred by irregularities and illegalities, including improper rejection of valid votes and acceptance of invalid votes in favor of respondent No. 1. The appellant claimed that the counting staff was biased and appointed by the Returning Officer to favor respondent No. 1. These allegations were detailed in paragraphs 11 to 24 of the election petition.

2. Bias and Improper Actions by the Returning Officer:
The appellant asserted that the Returning Officer was biased towards respondent No. 1 and had appointed counting staff of the latter's choice. It was further alleged that the manner of fixing tables for counting and the use of barbed wire to keep counting agents away from the process was contrary to the guidelines issued by the Election Commission of India. The appellant claimed that this setup prevented proper oversight by the counting agents.

3. Rejection of the Appellant's Application for Recount:
The appellant's application for a recount was rejected by the Returning Officer. The appellant argued that this rejection was wrongful and that the result prepared by the Returning Officer was inaccurate due to the irregularities committed during the counting process.

4. Preliminary Objections Raised by Respondent No. 1 Regarding Maintainability of the Election Petition:
Respondent No. 1 contested the election petition, raising preliminary objections that the allegations were scandalous, vague, and did not disclose any cause of action. The Court framed preliminary issues to address these objections. The Court found that the allegations in paragraphs 8 and 9 were not scandalous and that the petition did not suffer from vagueness or lack of material facts, deciding these issues in favor of the appellant.

5. Discrepancies and Tampering Allegations in Form XVI and Form XX:
The appellant pointed out discrepancies in Form XVI and Form XX, including erasures, cuttings, and over-writings, which were not certified by any officer. The appellant alleged that a new Form XX was prepared in violation of the rules to favor respondent No. 1. The Trial Court ordered a partial inspection of the ballot papers due to these suspicions.

6. Handling and Custody of Election Materials Post-Declaration of Results:
The appellant alleged that the Returning Officer retained the ballot papers and other election materials in his custody for an extended period after the declaration of the results, contrary to the rules. The appellant claimed that this custody led to tampering with the election materials. However, the Court found no evidence to support these allegations and concluded that the election materials were properly sealed and deposited in the Treasury.

7. Request for Partial Repoll by the Appellant:
The appellant argued that due to the broken or missing seals on some packets containing ballot papers, a partial repoll should be ordered. The Court, however, found no basis for this request as the recount confirmed the correctness of the votes polled. The Court held that post-declaration irregularities did not provide grounds for avoiding an election under Section 100 of the Representation of People Act.

8. Contempt of Court by the Appellant:
The appellant filed an application and a transfer petition containing derogatory and scandalous remarks against the learned Judge, which amounted to contempt of court. The appellant expressed an unqualified apology, which was accepted by the Court with a strong admonition and warning to be more careful in the future.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision. The recount confirmed the correctness of the election results, and the appellant's allegations of irregularities and tampering were not substantiated. The Court emphasized the importance of maintaining the dignity and decorum of the judiciary and issued a warning to the appellant for his contemptuous conduct.