FAO No.5574 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on May 11,2010. Charanjit Kaur --Appellant vs. Kiranjit Kaur and others -- Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Rajinder Goyal,Advocate,for the appellant Mr.S.S.Bhinder,Advocate,for respondent No.1. Mr.V.S.Rana,Advocate,for respondent Nos.2,3,4 & 6. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, This appeal is preferred by Charanjit Kaur against the order dated 20.10.2009, passed by learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda-cum-Presiding Officer of Election Tribunal, Bathinda, by which recounting of votes has been ordered on the basis of a statement suffered by Bhola Singh and Gurjant Singh that they would have no objection if votes are recounted. Gurjant Singh, who happens to be the husband of Charanjit Kaur(appellant) made a statement on her behalf that she would not object in recounting of votes. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that Charanjit Kaur had never made a statement before the Court that she would not have any objection if votes are recounted. It is further submitted that since the FAO No.5574 of 2009 (O&M) 2 appellant is a returned candidate (elected Panch) therefore, her election cannot be allowed to be effected on the ground of a statement suffered by her husband against her interest. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the order recorded by the Court below cannot be contradicted by the appellant by way of an appeal as the only course open to the appellant was to file an application before the same Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. Undisputedly, no statement has been made by Charanjit Kaur- to the effect that she has no objection to the counting of votes. It is, however, disputed that as to how and in what circumstances and under what authority statement was made by Gurjant Singh on her behalf. Assuming for the sake of argument that the statement was made by Gurjant Singh as alleged but the said statement cannot bind the appellant for the purpose of decision of the election petition because the statement made by a stranger to the election petition cannot effect right of a elected candidate. Thus, the order passed by the Court below is patently illegal and as such the same is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Presiding Officer of Election Tribunal, Bathinda, to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law as early as possible. Record of the election Tribunal be also returned to the Tribunal. May11,2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge FAO No.5574 of 2009 (O&M) 3