High Court Kerala High Court

K.M.Kurian vs M.M.Scariah on 16 July, 2007

Kerala High Court
K.M.Kurian vs M.M.Scariah on 16 July, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3153 of 2007(A)


1. K.M.KURIAN, S/O.MATHAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. M.M.SCARIAH, S/O.MATHUNNI,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANTHARAM.P

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.M.FIROZ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :16/07/2007

 O R D E R
                            M.N.KRISHNAN, J.

                   -----------------------------

                       WP(C)No. 3153 OF 2007 A

                   -----------------------------

                  Dated this the 16th July, 2007.



                                 JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of

the Munsiff-Magistrate, Perambra in I.A.744/06. The

grievance of the writ petitioner is disallowing of the

prayer by the learned Munsiff in calling for the documents

relating to double voting. The learned Munsiff disallowed

the prayers on two grounds viz., (i) the delay in making

the application and (ii) as per the rules it is to be

destroyed within one year and since the period is over it

may not be proper to summon the documents. I have been

taken through the election petition and in para 5 of the

election petition gives clear cut details regarding the

alleged double voting by giving the name as well as the

ward where the votes had been so cast. In the case of

double voting before getting the confidential documents

viz., ballot papers the court has to prima facie get

convinced that the name of the alleged persons figure in

the voting list of two wards and that their identity is

established and then only it can be found out whether they

have cast vote in two places, which as per the law is void.

I am informed by the learned counsel appearing for the

election commission that the documents are not yet

WPC 3153/07 2

destroyed and direction has been given to the Collector to

keep the documents in safe custody till the case is

disposed of by the court. Now the only question is

regarding delay. If these documents are not forthcoming

then virtually election petition itself will become

infructuous because without proving that fact election

petition cannot be proceeded with or in other words they

are vital documents for a proper decision of the case. So,

though there is delay since there is specific pleading in

the petition itself, I feel opportunity must be given to

get the documents examined in accordance with law.

Therefore, the order under challenge is set aside and the

learned Munsiff, on prima facie satisfaction of the fact

that the person’s name figure in two voters’ list in two

different wards and that their identification is proved

then call for the confidential documents and then proceed

to examine in accordance with law. I also direct the

election authorities not to destroy the said documents

until the case is finally disposed of by the court. I am

also informed by the learned counsel for the writ

petitioner that so far as the prayer relating to summoning

of the other document there had been some delay in payment

of bata that also may be considered sympathetically and the

necessary documents be called for in accordance with law

WPC 3153/07 3

and the matter be disposed of. Writ petition is disposed

of accordingly.

M.N.KRISHNAN

Judge

jj