IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH F.A.O. No. 3555 of 2006 Date of Decision : May 05, 2008 Saraj Singh ....Appellant Versus Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal-cum-Additional Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Dheeraj Narula, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for the appellant. Respondent No.2 already proceeded against ex parte. T.P.S. MANN, J. Order passed by learned Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal (Additional Deputy Commissioner), Ferozepur on 18.11.2005, while dismissing election petition filed by the appellant, stands challenged by him in the appeal filed under Section 100 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994. The election petition was filed earlier by the appellant for challenging the election of Harpreet Singh-respondent to the post of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, village Kari Kalan, Tehsil and District Ferozepur. The election was held on 13.7.2003. According to the appellant, 880 votes were polled in all. Out of them, 137 were cancelled. The F.A.O. No. 3555 of 2006 appellant got 370 votes while Harpreet Singh-respondent secured only 362 votes. The appellant was declared Sarpanch by 8 votes and, accordingly, Form No. 9 issued by the Presiding Officer on which the details of the votes polled were recorded. However, neither Harpreet Singh-respondent nor other three candidates, who had also participated in the election, accepted Form No. 9. At the time, when the election material was deposited in the office of Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Mamdot, the Returning Officer, in connivance with Harpreet Singh-respondent, drew a pistol and pointed it towards the Presiding Officer. Besides, he was threatened to prepare a fresh Form No. 9 and declare Harpreet Singh-respondent as having been elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. Therefore, it was prayed that the election petition be accepted, election of Harpreet Singh-respondent be set aside and the appellant be declared elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat of village Kari Kalan. In his written statement, Harpreet Singh-respondent submitted that Form No. 9, as claimed by the appellant, had been fabricated by the Presiding Officer in connivance with the appellant. In fact, it was he, i.e. Harpreet Singh who was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. The main plank of the appellant in support of his plea for setting aside the election of Harpreet Singh-respondent was Form No. 9, which he claimed to have been issued by the Presiding Officer, declaring the appellant as having been elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. It is not disputed that an FIR under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC stood registered against the appellant and Avtar Singh-Presiding Officer at -2- F.A.O. No. 3555 of 2006 Police Station Mamdot. It pertained to forgery/fabrication of Form No. 9 by the appellant and the Presiding Officer, who conspired together to come up with a version so as to seek setting aside of the election of Harpreet Singh- respondent. Once Form No. 9, as claimed by the appellant, is ruled out of consideration, there is no material available on the file from which it could be shown that the appellant had secured more votes than Harpreet Singh- respondent. As per the official records, Harpreet Singh-respondent secured 451 votes, while the appellant could only get 401 votes. The proceedings in the appeal have practically been rendered infructuous as the term of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Kari Kalan has almost come to an end. Fresh elections have already been ordered by the State Government for various Gram Panchayats in the State which are scheduled to be held on 12.5.2008. In view of the above, no case is made out for any interference in the impugned order passed by learned Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal, Ferozepur whereby the election petition filed by the appellant for challenging the election of Harpreet-Singh respondent was dismissed. The appeal is without any merit and, resultantly, dismissed. ( T.P.S. MANN ) May 05, 2008 JUDGE Satish Whether to be referred to the Reporters : YES / NO -3-