IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13070 of 2007 ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, son of Sri Chandradeep Singh, resident of village- Bishunpur, P.S. Benipatti, District- Madhubani, at present working as Member of Zila Parishad, Ward No. 5, Benipatti, Madhubani ------------------ Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Bihar State Election Commission through State Election Commissioner, Sone Bhawan, Patna. 3. District Election officer-cum-District magistrate, Madhubani. 4. Sub-Divisional Election Officer-cum-Sub-Divisional Officer, Benipatti, Madhubani 5. Election Officer-cum-Election Incharge cum-Block Development Officer, Benipatti, District- madhubani 6. Vote counting supervisor or Observer, Sri Ashok Kumar Sinha, Superintending Engineer, West Koshi Canal Circle, Jai nagar, Madhubani 7. Mahendra Narayan Rai son of Sri Gonar Rai, resident of Village- Laddugama, P.O. Agai, P.S. Benipatti, District- Madhubani -----------Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner :- Mr. R.B.N. Singh, Adv. For the State :- Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, J.C. to S.C. 16. For the Commission :- Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, Adv. --------------- 4. 26.11.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel of the State. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 26.7.2007 (Annexure- 1) passed by Sub-Judge, Ist, Madhubani in Election Case (Suit) No. 5 of 2006 by which he has rejected the petition of the petitioner for grant of time for filing the documents and list of witnesses. The petitioner is the elected candidate at the election held on the post of member of Zila Parishad. After the election, the aforesaid Election Case No. 5 of 2006 was filed in which he was made defendant no. 5. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the brother-in- law of the petitioner was undergoing treatment at Delhi and he was involved in the same and thus he could not give due attention to the election case that had been filed. It is stated that the petitioner became - 2 - aware of all these details much later in the month of July, 2007 and therefore on 26.7.2007 a petition had been filed for grant of some time to file the relevant documents and list of witnesses, but according to him the Court below has acted in an unreasonable manner depriving the petitioner of his valuable right to defend the case. The complete certified copy of the order sheet of the case has been produced from which it is evident that summons were served upon the petitioner before 1.9.2006 and subsequently various adjournments were given for filing the written statement. On 9.1.2007 the parties were heard on the point of settlement of issues and the issues were also settled and thereafter 1.2.2007 was fixed as the next date on which date parties were directed to produce the documents and list of witnesses. The Court had earlier on 21.12.2006 debarred the petitioner from filing the written statement but on consideration of his petition dated 1.2.2007 by order dated 12.4.2007 allowed him to contest the suit in the interest of justice and accepted the written statement filed on his behalf on payment of cost. Even thereafter several adjournments were granted for filing the documents and list of witnesses and ultimately by order dated 27.7.2007 when again the prayer for time was made by the petitioner, the same was rejected by the said order. On a consideration of the above circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality in the order of the learned Sub-Judge. The writ application is, therefore, dismissed. P. Kumar (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)