1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4527/2010. Kachru Narayan Wagh -: VERSUS :- The Returning Officere, Gramseva Sahakari Sanstha and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2010. Heard Shri P.S. Kshirsagar, learned Counsel for petitioner, Ms. R. Deshpande, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. Nobody appears for respondent no.3 even today. There was no appearance for him yesterday also. He has been served with notice for final disposal prior to 06.12.2010. His absence is also recorded by this Court in its earlier order dated 30.09.2010. On that date, the Court has specifically observed that he has to remain present on 08.10.2010 otherwise the Court will pass appropriate orders. On very same date this Court also directed that result of election from borrowers constituency shall not be declared until further orders. 2 Learned A.G.P. states that the results are still not declared. Annexure-3 with the petition is judgment of this Court dated 21.09.2007 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 207 and 282 of 1994 and Criminal Revision No. 123/1994. Respondent no.3 is appellant in Criminal Appeal No.207/1994, Respondent no.2 in Criminal Appeal No. 282/1994 and opponent no.3 in Criminal Revision No.123/1994. His conviction for offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code formed subject matter of that challenge. The Trial Court had not convicted them for offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. This Court in its above judgment has convicted them also for offence punishable under Section 307 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The present respondent no.3 was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, he was directed to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. This punishment was maintained by this Court after observing that the offence was committed about 20 years back and after noting that the attack was brutal and out of political rivalry. 3 This conviction was suppressed by respondent no.3. The petitioner along with his objection before respondent no.1 Returning Officer produced copy of this judgment of High court, but then that copy was not accepted by the Returning Officer. Respondent no.3 also did not accept his conviction at that stage, with the result he contested the election. During hearing, Shri P.S. Kshirsagar, learned Counsel has informed court that as per the counting undertaken by respondent no.1, respondent no.3 is already defeated. It is to be noted that respondent no.3 is disqualified to contest election. In view of the statement made by the learned Counsel for petitioner and also request by him, respondent no.1 is permitted to declare the result of the elections. Respondent no.3 who has been found guilty of brutal attack out of political rivalry, has attempted to contest elections suppressing that conviction. Hence, petitioner is awarded costs of Rs. 5000/- for approaching this Court in the matter. Costs are directed to be paid by respondent no.3 to him by 31.12.2010. If the costs are not so paid, petitioner is permitted to recover the same in accordance with law from respondent no.3. 4 With these directions, Writ Petition is partly allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Rgd.