FAO No.3851 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 133 SUKHWINDER KAUR Vs MANDEEP KAUR AND ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Present: Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Komal Klana, Advocate for Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate for respondent nos.4 and 5. HARKESH MANUJA, J. CM No.12729-CII of Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of filing the present appeal. Notice of the application was issued on 25.07.2023. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and mentioned in the application has been made out. present appeal is condoned. Main case 1. By way of the present appeal, challenge has been laid to the dated 12.04.2023 Magistrate, Malout (for short ‘the Tribunal’) preferred at the instance of the No.1 as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat village Hakkuwala, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, was 2023 (O&M ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No.3851 Date of Decision: SUKHWINDER KAUR MANDEEP KAUR AND ORS. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the appellant. Ms. Komal Klana, Advocate for Mr. Kanwal Goyal, Advocate for respondent nos.4 and 5. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. CII of 2023 Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of filing the present appeal. Notice of the application was issued on 25.07.2023. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and mentioned in the application which is supported by an affidavit, has been made out. The application is allowed and present appeal is condoned. By way of the present appeal, challenge has been laid to the 12.04.2023 passed by the learned Election Tribunal Magistrate, Malout (for short ‘the Tribunal’) preferred at the instance of the appellant, assailing the No.1 as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat village Hakkuwala, Tehsil Malout, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, was dismissed. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 3851 of 2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2006 …Appellant …Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of 24 days in Notice of the application was issued on 25.07.2023. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and for the reaso which is supported by an affidavit, sufficient cause allowed and delay of 24 days in filing the By way of the present appeal, challenge has been laid to the decision learned Election Tribunal-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Malout (for short ‘the Tribunal’), whereby the election petition assailing the declaration of respondent No.1 as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat village Hakkuwala, Tehsil Malout, District 1 days in for the reasons sufficient cause days in filing the decision Sub Divisional , whereby the election petition declaration of respondent No.1 as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat village Hakkuwala, Tehsil Malout, District MOHMED ATIK 2026.08.31 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3851 of 2023 2. The appellant sough the setting aside of the election of respondent No.1 on the following grounds: (A) reason. Although some are valid votes and some were also polled in favour of the petitioner. (B) opposite party 2 and no grievance Presiding Officer although after raising the objection by the petitioner and her agents. (C) even 3 ignoring the objections of the petitioner and her (D) who were posted out of the Village and they were not present in the village on the same day. (E) wives/sister impression in place of actual voters on counter files. Objections were raised by the petitioner and her agents. But the Presiding Officer paid no heed towards the objections of petitioner and her po (F) sent to the Polling Station of Village Middu Khera which was belonging to village Hakkuwala and 6/7 votes from the above said bundle were polled at Booth no. 63 of Village M Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth no. 63 of village Middu Khera. Bundle of above said votes is not traceable and same was counted in the votes of respondent no. 1 by the respondent in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1. Regarding the above said bundle received by the Presiding Officer of Village Middu Khera which belonged to Village Hakkuwala Tehsil Malout District Sri Muktsar Sahib, a phone call w the petitioner with Jassa Singh Returning Officer, Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur polling officer of Booth no. 63 of Village Middu Khera. At the time of recording the above said conversation Gurdee at the Mobile No. 70099 2023 (O&M ) The appellant sough the setting aside of the election of respondent No.1 on the following grounds:- The votes of the petitioner are rejected without any rhyme and reason. Although some are valid votes and some were also polled in favour of the petitioner. ) The number of dead persons votes have been got polled by the opposite party 2 and no grievance of the petitioner was listened by the Presiding Officer although after raising the objection by the petitioner and her agents. (C) The number of NRI votes have been got polled by the opposite party even 3 ignoring the objections of the petitioner and her (D) The number of votes of employees were polled by the other party who were posted out of the Village and they were not present in the village on the same day. (E) So many votes had been got polled by the husbands/brothers of their wives/sisters and old aged persons after puting their signatures/thum impression in place of actual voters on counter files. Objections were raised by the petitioner and her agents. But the Presiding Officer paid no heed towards the objections of petitioner and her po (F) A bundle of ballot papers (number of hundred) was intentionally sent to the Polling Station of Village Middu Khera which was belonging to village Hakkuwala and 6/7 votes from the above said bundle were polled at Booth no. 63 of Village Middu Khera under the supervision of Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth no. 63 of village Middu Khera. Bundle of above said votes is not traceable and same was counted in the votes of respondent no. 1 by the respondent in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1. Regarding the above said bundle received by the Presiding Officer of Village Middu Khera which belonged to Village Hakkuwala Tehsil Malout District Sri Muktsar Sahib, a phone call was recorded by Gurdeep Singh, husband of the petitioner with Jassa Singh Returning Officer, Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur polling officer of Booth no. 63 of Village Middu Khera. At the time of recording the above said conversation Gurdeep Singh husband of the petitioner used the Mobile No. 98786 at the Mobile No. 70099-71916 with Robin Singh Presiding Officer and at The appellant sough the setting aside of the election of respondent The votes of the petitioner are rejected without any rhyme and reason. Although some are valid votes and some were also polled in favour The number of dead persons votes have been got polled by the of the petitioner was listened by the Presiding Officer although after raising the objection by the petitioner and The number of NRI votes have been got polled by the opposite party even 3 ignoring the objections of the petitioner and her agents. The number of votes of employees were polled by the other party who were posted out of the Village and they were not present in the village So many votes had been got polled by the husbands/brothers of their s and old aged persons after puting their signatures/thum impression in place of actual voters on counter files. Objections were raised by the petitioner and her agents. But the Presiding Officer paid no heed towards the objections of petitioner and her polling agents. A bundle of ballot papers (number of hundred) was intentionally sent to the Polling Station of Village Middu Khera which was belonging to village Hakkuwala and 6/7 votes from the above said bundle were polled at iddu Khera under the supervision of Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth no. 63 of village Middu Khera. Bundle of above said votes is not traceable and same was counted in the votes of respondent no. 1 by the respondent no. 4 and 5 in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1. Regarding the above said bundle received by the Presiding Officer of Village Middu Khera which belonged to Village Hakkuwala Tehsil Malout District Sri as recorded by Gurdeep Singh, husband of the petitioner with Jassa Singh Returning Officer, Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur polling officer of Booth no. 63 of Village Middu Khera. At the time of recording the above said conversation p Singh husband of the petitioner used the Mobile No. 98786-04977 71916 with Robin Singh Presiding Officer and at 2 The appellant sough the setting aside of the election of respondent The votes of the petitioner are rejected without any rhyme and reason. Although some are valid votes and some were also polled in favour The number of dead persons votes have been got polled by the of the petitioner was listened by the Presiding Officer although after raising the objection by the petitioner and The number of NRI votes have been got polled by the opposite party The number of votes of employees were polled by the other party who were posted out of the Village and they were not present in the village So many votes had been got polled by the husbands/brothers of their s and old aged persons after puting their signatures/thum impression in place of actual voters on counter files. Objections were raised by the petitioner and her agents. But the Presiding Officer paid no A bundle of ballot papers (number of hundred) was intentionally sent to the Polling Station of Village Middu Khera which was belonging to village Hakkuwala and 6/7 votes from the above said bundle were polled at iddu Khera under the supervision of Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth no. 63 of village Middu Khera. Bundle of above said votes is not traceable and same no. 4 and 5 in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1. Regarding the above said bundle received by the Presiding Officer of Village Middu Khera which belonged to Village Hakkuwala Tehsil Malout District Sri as recorded by Gurdeep Singh, husband of the petitioner with Jassa Singh Returning Officer, Robin Singh Presiding Officer and Jaswinder Kaur polling officer of Booth no. 63 of Village Middu Khera. At the time of recording the above said conversation 04977 71916 with Robin Singh Presiding Officer and at MOHMED ATIK 2026.08.31 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3851 of 2023 the mobile no. 98767 No. 63 of Village Middu Khera and also with th with Jassa Singh Returning Officer. C.D. of above said mobile conversation was prepared and same is attatched with the present petition along with Punjabi version for the kind perusal of this Ho (G) wall of Polling Station Village Hakkuwala and the name of Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 was written as Ajay Kumar, but when the election was started then Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 was Working/appointed a Presiding Officerof Booth No. 26 without disclosing any reason in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1 to give the benefit to the respondent no. 1 because Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 1.e. Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 has been dec of the respondent no. 1 to give her undue benefit which is under challenged. (H) been got polled in village Hakkuwala although the some persons are having been got listen although the objection has been raised (I) invalid votes of respondent no. 1 and votes of respondent no. 1 malafidely. (J) show the votes to Gurdeep Singh even after repeated requests. (K) respondent no. 4 and 5 so many times to recount the Votes, but they refused to do so. (L) connivance with the respondent no. 1 and 3 when the Counting Agent of t petitioner requested for recounting the votes, but they flatly refused. (M) counting and counted the rejected and invalid vot respondent (N) were to the petitioner. 2023 (O&M ) the mobile no. 98767-80518 with Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth No. 63 of Village Middu Khera and also with th with Jassa Singh Returning Officer. C.D. of above said mobile conversation was prepared and same is attatched with the present petition along with Punjabi version for the kind perusal of this Ho (G) List of the name of the Presiding Officer Booth wise affixed on the wall of Polling Station Village Hakkuwala and the name of Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 was written as Ajay Kumar, but when the election was started then Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 was Working/appointed a Presiding Officerof Booth No. 26 without disclosing any reason in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1 to give the benefit to the respondent no. 1 because Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 1.e. Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 has been dec of the respondent no. 1 to give her undue benefit which is under challenged. (H) Double votes which are already in other villages, the same has also been got polled in village Hakkuwala although the some persons are having votes in other village also and no grievance of the petitioner has been got listen although the objection has been raised Even after repeated requests, the Presiding Officer did not reject the invalid votes of respondent no. 1 and votes of respondent no. 1 malafidely. Counting Agent by the petitioner and respondent no. 4 and 5 did not show the votes to Gurdeep Singh even after repeated requests. (K) Gurdeep Singh Counting Agent of the respondent no. 4 and 5 so many times to recount the Votes, but they refused to do so. (L) The respondent no. 4 and 5 played unfair role during the counting in connivance with the respondent no. 1 and 3 when the Counting Agent of t petitioner requested for recounting the votes, but they flatly refused. (M) The respondent no. 4 and 5 have played unfair role during the counting and counted the rejected and invalid vot respondent no. 1. (N) The respondent no. 4 and 5 in connivance with the respondent no. 1 were indulged practice at the time of counting which has caused prejudice to the petitioner. 80518 with Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth No. 63 of Village Middu Khera and also with the Mobile No. 96461-15041 with Jassa Singh Returning Officer. C.D. of above said mobile conversation was prepared and same is attatched with the present petition along with Punjabi version for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. the Presiding Officer Booth wise affixed on the wall of Polling Station Village Hakkuwala and the name of Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 was written as Ajay Kumar, but when the election was started then Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 was Working/appointed a Presiding Officerof Booth No. 26 without disclosing any reason in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1 to give the benefit to the respondent no. 1 because Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 1.e. Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 has been declared result illegally in favour of the respondent no. 1 to give her undue benefit which is under challenged. Double votes which are already in other villages, the same has also been got polled in village Hakkuwala although the some persons are votes in other village also and no grievance of the petitioner has been got listen although the objection has been raised by the petitioner. Even after repeated requests, the Presiding Officer did not reject the invalid votes of respondent no. 1 and counted these invalid votes as valid Counting Agent by the petitioner and respondent no. 4 and 5 did not show the votes to Gurdeep Singh even after repeated requests. Gurdeep Singh Counting Agent of the petitioner requested the respondent no. 4 and 5 so many times to recount the Votes, but they refused The respondent no. 4 and 5 played unfair role during the counting in connivance with the respondent no. 1 and 3 when the Counting Agent of t petitioner requested for recounting the votes, but they flatly refused. The respondent no. 4 and 5 have played unfair role during the counting and counted the rejected and invalid votes in favour of this and 5 in connivance with the respondent no. 1 indulged practice at the time of counting which has caused prejudice 3 80518 with Jaswinder Kaur Polling Officer of Booth 15041 with Jassa Singh Returning Officer. C.D. of above said mobile conversation was prepared and same is attatched with the present petition along with the Presiding Officer Booth wise affixed on the wall of Polling Station Village Hakkuwala and the name of Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 was written as Ajay Kumar, but when the election was started then Sohan Lal respondent no. 4 was Working/appointed as Presiding Officerof Booth No. 26 without disclosing any reason in connivance with the respondent no. 3 and respondent no. 1 to give the benefit to the respondent no. 1 because Presiding Officer of Booth No. 26 illegally in favour of the respondent no. 1 to give her undue benefit which is under challenged. Double votes which are already in other villages, the same has also been got polled in village Hakkuwala although the some persons are votes in other village also and no grievance of the petitioner has Even after repeated requests, the Presiding Officer did not reject the counted these invalid votes as valid Counting Agent by the petitioner and respondent no. 4 and 5 did not petitioner requested the respondent no. 4 and 5 so many times to recount the Votes, but they refused The respondent no. 4 and 5 played unfair role during the counting in connivance with the respondent no. 1 and 3 when the Counting Agent of the The respondent no. 4 and 5 have played unfair role during the es in favour of this and 5 in connivance with the respondent no. 1 indulged practice at the time of counting which has caused prejudice MOHMED ATIK 2026.08.31 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document FAO No.3851 of 2023 (0) respondent no. 1 supplied the Liquor and money to openly. The petitioner raised the objection before the respondent no. 4 and 5 but they flatly refused to take action against 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. 4. A perusal of the i prove the allegations levelled by her in the election petition as no from the records of the State Election Commission/Returning Officer was ever summoned and proved on record been placed on record to establish that any objection was ever raised by the appellant or any of her authorized agent(s) at the time of voting or the counting. Moreover, the term of election has also expired by now. 5. In these circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned decision passed by the learned Election Tribunal. The present appeal is, therefore, dismissed being devoid of merits. 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand of. August 27, 2026 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2023 (O&M ) (0) The respondent no. 1 and supporters and family members of the respondent no. 1 supplied the Liquor and money to openly. The petitioner raised the objection before the respondent no. 4 and 5 but they flatly refused to take action against I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the A perusal of the impugned order shows that the appellant failed to prove the allegations levelled by her in the election petition as no from the records of the State Election Commission/Returning Officer was ever summoned and proved on record in this regard been placed on record to establish that any objection was ever raised by the appellant or any of her authorized agent(s) at the time of voting or the counting. Moreover, the term of election has also expired by now. In these circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned decision passed by the learned Election Tribunal. The present appeal is, therefore, dismissed being devoid of merits. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand 6 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No The respondent no. 1 and supporters and family members of the respondent no. 1 supplied the Liquor and money to purchase the votes openly. The petitioner raised the objection before the respondent no. 4 and 5 but they flatly refused to take action against them.” I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the mpugned order shows that the appellant failed to prove the allegations levelled by her in the election petition as no material evidence from the records of the State Election Commission/Returning Officer was ever d. Besides it, even no material has been placed on record to establish that any objection was ever raised by the appellant or any of her authorized agent(s) at the time of voting or the counting. Moreover, the term of election has also expired by now. In these circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned decision passed by the learned Election Tribunal. The present appeal is, Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE 4 The respondent no. 1 and supporters and family members of the purchase the votes openly. The petitioner raised the objection before the respondent no. 4 and I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the mpugned order shows that the appellant failed to material evidence from the records of the State Election Commission/Returning Officer was ever . Besides it, even no material has been placed on record to establish that any objection was ever raised by the appellant or any of her authorized agent(s) at the time of voting or the counting. In these circumstances, no interference is called for with the impugned decision passed by the learned Election Tribunal. The present appeal is, disposed MOHMED ATIK 2026.08.31 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document