In a relief to Sohra MLA Gavin Miguel Mylliem, the Meghalaya High Court today decided to take up the issues raised by him regarding the election petition filed by Titostarwell Chyne.
Chyne who lost the 2023 Assembly elections from Sohra constituency had moved an election petition in the High Court challenging the election of Mylliem as MLA.
The bench of Justice Hamarsan Singh Thangkhiew passed the judgement today on the application filed by Mylliem pointing out the defects in the election petition filed by Chyne.
Justice Thangkhiew referred to the verdict of the Gauhati High Court in the case of Abdul Jabbar vs Syeda Anwara Taimur & Ors which had held that the election petition is said to be filed only when it is presented to the proper officer for acceptance for record in the office.
“In consideration of the facts and circumstances as discussed, and in light of the judgment rendered in the case of Abdul Jabbar vs Syeda Anwara Taimur & Ors (supra), this court being unable to arrive at a conclusive finding as to the presence of the election petitioner at the time of presentation, and in view of the cryptic report furnished by the Stamp Reporter, deems it fit to take up the issues raised in the instant application as to the presentation, as preliminary issues for consideration. Accordingly, the instant application stands disposed of,” Justice Thangkhiew said.
According to the High Court, stringent requirements have to be followed in filing and presentation of an election petition. It also said that as observed by the Supreme Court, an election petition is a serious matter with a variety of consequences.
The High Court also said that certain doubts had arisen which occasioned the court by order dated September 15, 2023, to call for a report from the Stamp Reporter, which was furnished on September 27, 2023.
However, in the report, the Stamp Reporter only verified that the Stamp report of the main election petition was affixed at the first page of the petition as a check slip as per practice of the Registry. The report when perused together with the check slip dated April 12, 2023 bearing Filing Serial No. 189 of 2023, apart from indicating that the case was ready, “does not disclose as to whether the presentation of the same was made personally by the election petitioner”.
“Compounded with the inconclusive report of the Stamp Reporter, is the submission of the counsel of the election petitioner during arguments of the instant application that the election petitioner was present at the time of presentation in the campus. The fact therefore, as to whether the election petitioner was present or not, cannot be conclusively ascertained at this stage from the materials on record, to warrant the application Section 86 of the RP Act to dismiss the election petition outrightly,” the High Court said.
Earlier during the arguments in the High Court, S Sahay, the lawyer for Mylliem said that Chyne had not presented the election petition before the Stamp Reporter personally. He also said that there is no endorsement of the Stamp Reporter in the petition and that the report of the Stamp Reporter does not show that the election petition was personally presented by Chyne as the election petitioner.
Sahay further contended that Section 81 (3) of the Representation of the People Act allowed each and every copy of the election petition to be attested by the election petitioner under his own signature while filing the election petition.
He also argued that since Chyne had not presented the election petition personally, his election petition by virtue of Section 86 of the Representation of the People Act is therefore liable to be dismissed.
