VIJAY BAHADUR versus SUNIL KUMAR & ORS.

VIJAY BAHADUR versus SUNIL KUMAR & ORS.

Given that three of the four candidates questioned the propriety of the election, material electoral records (the Presiding Officer's diary) were missing and could not be located despite efforts, and there were allegations of improper conduct at the polling area (including use of police to remove the appellant), the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was prima facie justified in directing a recount of the votes for the relevant booths; the High Court's order setting aside that direction was therefore set aside and the recount order restored.

Parties
Appellant: Vijay Bahadur; Respondent: Sunil Kumar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (civil Appellate Jurisdiction) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment Under Article 226
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Recount of Votes, Secrecy of Ballot, Election Petition, Preservation of Electoral Records, Judicial Review of Electoral Orders
Election Law Constitutional Law Panchayat Law Administrative Law Recount of Votes Secrecy of Ballot Election Petition Preservation of Electoral Records +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vijay Bahadur

Appellant

Sunil Kumar & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (civil Appellate Jurisdiction) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From High Court Judgment Under Article 226

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was justified in ordering a recount of votes
  2. 2 Whether the disparity between the Presiding Officer's oral statement and Form 46 justified a recount
  3. 3 Whether missing Presiding Officer diary and other electoral documents justified reopening the count

Ratio Decidendi

Given that three of the four candidates questioned the propriety of the election, material electoral records (the Presiding Officer's diary) were missing and could not be located despite efforts, and there were allegations of improper conduct at the polling area (including use of police to remove the appellant), the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was prima facie justified in directing a recount of the votes for the relevant booths; the High Court's order setting aside that direction was therefore set aside and the recount order restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of the High Court dated 27.01.2023 in Writ-C No.35734 of 2022 set aside
  • Order dated 31.10.2022 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Election Petition No.02010/2021 directing recount restored