PATNA, India, Sept. 17 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on Aug. 18:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the State Election Commission.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:-
"I. Issuance of appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions directing Respondents to conduct a comprehensive examination and inquiry into duplicate and cross-Panchayat voting in the election held on 28.06.2025 in Nagar Panchayat, Khusropur, Patna;
II. Issuance of appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions directing stay the final certification of the election result for the post of Chairperson, Nagar Panchayat, Khusropur, till such time as illegal votes are identified and excluded from final tally;
III. Issuance of appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions directing direct the cancellation of all votes cast through dual voting (e-voting and offline) by the same individuals, and declare the election null and void if such cancellation materially affects the outcome; IV. Issuance of appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions directing disciplinary and penal proceedings against election officials and others under Section 171 of the BNS, 2023 and Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 2025 (amended);
V. Pass any other order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present matter, the petitioner has participated in the election process for election of Chief Councillor/Chairman in the Khusropur Nagar Panchayat held on 28.06.2025 conducted under the aegis of respondent authorities. Counsel submits that the guideline has been issued under which the voting has to be accepted through e-voting also. Counsel submits that the procedure which has been adopted by the Election Commission resulted into duplicacy of voting. He specifically submits that one name of one voter has entered in the offline as well as in the online mode and doubling of the counting of voting took place. It is due to this reason, the other candidate has been selected and the petitioner could not be selected. Counsel submits that he is relying on his pleading particularly paragraph nos.17 and 18 in which he has submitted a tabular list of such duplicate voters and submits that the representation has been made to the CEO, DM and SDO showing the EPIC number that name of those candidates have duplicated in the election process. Counsel has categorically indicated in paragraph no.18 that duplicate voting through two modes took place and the duplicate voting was allowed in two distinct panchayat jurisdictions maintaining two EPIC numbers or slightly varied names under the same family lineage.
The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/MTUjMTI4MTgjMjAyNSMxI04=-p--ak1--s9vEth4s4=
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
