AJIT SINGH versus BANSI SINGH AND ORS.

AJIT SINGH versus BANSI SINGH AND ORS.

Measures such as fencing and police presence during vote counting, justified by reasonable apprehension of disturbance and practical necessity due to number of candidates and agents, do not vitiate the counting process when agents had access per first-come-first-sit and evidence showed proper conduct. Acceptance of postal ballots received before the commencement of counting of votes is valid under Rule 27 as amended. Presence of relatives/proteges among counting staff is not ground for voiding election absent convincing evidence of impropriety materially affecting results. High Court’s factual findings on proper counting are to be affirmed in absence of cogent contrary evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Ajit Singh; Respondent No. 1: Bansi Singh; Respondents: Others (Ors.)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 July 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 15.9.92 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in E.p. No. 15 of 1991
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conduct of Election Rules 1961 Rules 27, 54, 54 a, Postal Ballot Interpretation Validity Period, Section 81 Representation of People Act 1951, Scope of Supreme Court's Power in Election Petitions, Counting of Ballot Papers and Role of Returning Officer
Election Law Conduct of Election Rules 1961 Rules 27, 54, 54 a Postal Ballot Interpretation Validity Period Section 81 Representation of People Act 1951 Scope of Supreme Court's Power in Election Petitions Counting of Ballot Papers and Role of Returning Officer

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ajit Singh

Appellant

Bansi Singh

Respondent No. 1

Others (Ors.)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 15.9.92 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in E.p. No. 15 of 1991

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether measures taken during counting, including fencing and police presence, vitiated the proceedings and deprived agents of opportunity to observe the count
  2. 2 Whether acceptance of postal ballots received after polling but before counting commencement was valid
  3. 3 Whether the presence of Returning Officer's relatives/proteges among counting assistants justified invalidation of results

Ratio Decidendi

Measures such as fencing and police presence during vote counting, justified by reasonable apprehension of disturbance and practical necessity due to number of candidates and agents, do not vitiate the counting process when agents had access per first-come-first-sit and evidence showed proper conduct. Acceptance of postal ballots received before the commencement of counting of votes is valid under Rule 27 as amended. Presence of relatives/proteges among counting staff is not ground for voiding election absent convincing evidence of impropriety materially affecting results. High Court’s factual findings on proper counting are to be affirmed in absence of cogent contrary evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No interference with High Court findings
  • Election result not set aside