Patna High Court
Doli Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 19 December, 2024
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19153 of 2024
======================================================
1. Doli Devi Wife of Ranjeet Kumar, Resident of Govind Bara, P.O. and P.S. -
Phenhara, District - East Champaran, Bihar- 845430.
2. Shiv Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ramadhar Singh, Resident of village and
P.O. - Ijor Bara, P.S. - Phenhara, District- East Champaran at Motihari.
3. Lakhindra Mahto, Son of Late Ramekbal Mahto, Resident of Village and
P.O. - Mankarwa, P.S. - Phenhara, District- East Champaran at Motihari.
4. Chandani Singh, Wife of Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, Resident of village-
Kalupakar, P.O. - Kalupakar, P.S. - Phenhara, District- East Champaran at
Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The State Election Commission (Panchayat) through the Secretary, Beer
Chand Patel Path, Sone Bhawan, Patna, Bihar - 800001.
4. The District Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari.
5. The District Panchayat Raj Officer, East Champaran at Motihari.
6. The Block Development Officer-Cum-Executive Officer, Block - Phenhara,
District - East Champaran.
7. Sri Radheshyam Singh, Son of Late Raj Mangal Singh, Resident of village-
Ibrahimpur Parsauni, P.O. - Ibrahimpur Parsauni, P.S.- Phenhara, District -
East Champaran at Motihari, Presently Pramukh of the Phenhara, Block
Panchayat Samiti. Respondent No. - 7 is the Pramukh.
8. Smt. Maya Devi, Wife of Sri Kishori Sah, Resident of Village- Rupauli, P.O.
- Kumharara, P.S.- Phenhara, District - East Champaran at Motihari.
Respondent No. 8 is the elected member of the Block Panchayat Samiti,
Phenhara through the Block Development Officer- Cum-Executive Officer,
Block Panchayat Samiti, Phenhara, P.O. and P.S. - Phenhara, District- East
Champaran.
9. Sri Sanjay Sahani, Son of Late Munni Sahani, Resident of Village-
Khanpipra, P.O. - Mathurapur, P.S. - Phenhara, District - East Champaran at
Motihari. Respondent No. 9 is the elected member of the Block Panchayat
Samiti, Phenhara through the Block Development Officer- Cum-Executive
Officer, Block Panchayat Samiti, Phenhara, P.O. and P.S. - Phenhara,
District- East Champaran.
10. Sri Bablu Kumar Singh, Son of Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of village
and P.O. - Phenhara, P.S. - Phenhara, District- East Champaran at Motihari.
Respondent No. 10 is the elected member of the Block Panchayat Samiti,
Phenhara through the Block Development Officer- Cum-Executive Officer,
Block Panchayat Samiti, Phenhara, P.O. and P.S. - Phenhara, District- East
Champaran.
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
2/9
11. Sri Sonu Ram, Son of Late Laxman Ram, Resident of Village and P.O. -
Mathurapur, P.S.- Phenhara, District - East Champaran at Motihari.
Respondent No. 11 is the elected member of the Block Panchayat Samiti,
Phenhara through the Block Development Officer- Cum-Executive Officer,
Block Panchayat Samiti, Phenhara, P.O. and P.S. - Phenhara, District- East
Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S B K Mangalam with
Mr. Vikash Kumar Singh, Advocates
For the State : Ms. Binita Singh, SC 28
For the SEC : Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate
=======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-12-2024
Heard Mr. S. B. K. Mangalam, learned Advocate for
the petitioners and Ms. Binita Singh, learned Standing Counsel-
28 for the State. Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned Advocate appears for
the State Election Commission.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved with the order dated
27.11.2024
, contained in Memo No. 502, passed by the
respondent no. 4, whereby the respondent no. 4 was pleased to
declare all the votes marked in the ballot paper as “correct”
being prejudiced by his order dated 21.09.2024 contained in
Memo No. 392(ka).
3. Mr. Mangalam, learned Advocate for the petitioners
vehemently contended that the impugned order is in complete
defiance of the order passed by this Court dated 29.10.2024 in
C.W.J.C. No. 16681 of 2024, whereby this Court remanded the
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
3/9
matter to the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari
with a direction to pass a detailed order describing each and
every ballot papers and marks thereon, with a further direction
that the identity of the voter should not be disclosed.
4. Referring to the impugned order, learned Advocate
for the petitioners contended that this time again similar mistake
has been done and the District Magistrate, East Champaran,
Motihari has only said that cross “x” marks have been found on
all the ballots, which is contrary to mandate of this Court and an
oblique move of the concerned respondent.
5. Mr. Mangalam, learned Advocate for the petitioners
drawing the attention of this Court to Rules 95 and 96 of the
Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 2006 vehemently contended
that the procedure of poll has been duly provided under Rule 95
with a clear prescription that each member shall be given a
ballot paper separately on which he/she shall mark his/her vote
by putting secretly a cross (x) mark against the name of a
candidate.
6. Rule 96 talks about the invalid votes, which reads as
follows:
“96. Invalid Votes- A ballot
paper shall be treated as invalid if:-
(a) it bears the signature of a
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
4/9member or there is any such visible word
which may lead to the identification of the
voter; or
(b) the cross (x) mark has been
made against the name of more than one
candidate; or
(c) The mark has been made in
such a manner that it can not be
ascertained as to which candidate the vote
has been cast; or
(d) no cross mark has been made
on it; or
(e) it does not bear the signature
of the Presiding Officer.”
7. It is the contention of the petitioners that the vote is
fit to be declared as a valid if there is no other visible words or
sign, which may lead to identification of a voters; putting of
plus “+’ marks on a ballot clearly makes the vote invalid.
8. Attention of this Court has also been drawn to the
decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case Kuldeep
Kumar vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh & Ors. reported in
(2024) 3 SCC 526 which highlighted the significant importance
of the fairness in election and mandated a duty cast upon the
election authority to conduct free, fair and impartial election.
Further reliance has also been placed on a decision rendered by
the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
5/9
Shobhna Kumari vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. in CWJC No.
13287 of 2024 wherein the Court in order to give quietus to the
litigation has called for the ballot paper.
9. Referring thereto, he also prays before this Court
that if the ballot papers shall be produced before this Court, the
entire dispute shall be resolved.
10. The request of the petitioners has been confronted
by the learned Advocate for the State and submission has been
made that pursuant to the direction of this Court, the ballots
have been examined in presence of all the members of the
Panchayat Samiti, and the entire episode was duly
videographed. After having satisfied, the District Magistrate has
given a finding that all the ballots contain cross “x” marks.
11. Drawing the attention of this Court to the order
passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 2506 of 2024, learned
Advocate for the State has submitted that earlier the petitioner
no.1 had approached before this Court with identical grievance
that at the time of voting one of the members put the sign of ‘+’
instead of ‘x’, which is mandatory. Taking note of the grievance,
only for satisfaction of the petitioner, the Court has directed that
she may prefer a representation before the District Magistrate,
East Champaran, Motihari, who shall look into the matter and
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
6/9
do the needful.
12. In pursuant thereto, the petitioner preferred a
proper representation and thereafter the order has been passed
contained in Memo No. 392(ka) dated 21.09.2024. Copy of
which is marked as Annexure-P/5.
13. Admittedly in the afore-noted impugned order, the
identification of the voters have been disclosed and, as such, the
petitioner no.1 being aggrieved, again approached before this
Court in CWJC No 16681 of 2024. The learned Court on being
found that the description of each and every ballot papers
containing marks over there has not been dealt with, again
remitted the matter to the District Magistrate, East Champaran,
Motihari with a direction to pass a detailed order describing
each and every ballot papers and marks thereon.
14. In pursuant to the order aforenoted, the District
Magistrate has directed for appearance of all the members of the
Panchayat Samiti and thereafter in presence of all the members,
the sealed ballot box was opened and it has been found that all
the ballots contain cross “x” marks.
15. In the aforesaid premise, learned Advocate for the
State submits that since all the ballot papers were twice
examined by the District Magistrate and no infirmity has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
7/9
found, thus no further examination of ballot is required.
16. This Court has anxiously heard the learned
Advocate for the parties and also perused the materials available
on record.
17. Admittedly the special meeting for consideration
of No Confidence Motion against the petitioner no.1 was
convened on 18.01.2024 on requisition dated 04.01.2024. No
Confidence Motion brought against the petitioner no.1 was
passed. Five votes were polled in favour of no confidence and
four votes against the motion, which fact was duly recorded in
the proceeding of special meeting dated 18.01.2024.
18. Twice the ballot was duly examined in pursuant to
the order of this Court in presence of all the members by the
District Magistrate-cum-District Election Officer, East
Champaran. In the earlier round of litigation in CWJC No. 2506
of 2024, the petitioner no.1 had expressly conceded that she
only wants to get herself satisfied whether the votes polled
against her were proper manner or not. In the aforesaid premise,
this Court taking note of the fact that there is no
rules/guidelines, but only for the satisfaction of the petitioner
directed the District Magistrate to look into the matter and do
the needful.
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
8/9
19. There is neither any allegation of malpractice by
candidate nor against the Presiding Officer. None of the
candidate admitted the position of putting ‘+’ marks in place of
‘x’ marks. In compliance with the order of this Court, passed in
subsequent writ petition, now fresh examination of ballot was
done and videographed and it has been found all the ballot
contains ‘x’ marks.
20. Moreover, the reliance of the petitioners on a
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kuldeep
Kumar (supra) was passed to do complete justice and to ensure
that process of electoral democracy is not thwarted by
subterfuges on the part of the electoral misconduct by the
Presiding Officer himself, in treating the votes invalid as a result
of the mark which were put by him. The video footage leaves no
manner of doubt that the Presiding Officer, while initialling the
ballot papers placed an ink mark on the lower half of eight
ballot papers, all of which were cast in favour of Kuldeep
Kumar, However, in the case in hand, the facts are quite distinguishable and
no such irregularity is either alleged or found. All the ballots were examined in
presence of all the members of Panchayat Samiti and found only marks
thereon. Hence in the opinion of this Court, there must be given quietus to the
dispute, all the more, the petitioner no. 1 was holding the post
Patna High Court CWJC No.19153 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024
9/9
at the will of the people.
21. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 23.12.2024 Transmission Date