Patna High Court

Guddu SinghversusThe State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department

Decided: 27 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: S B P SINGH

Holding

The court quashed the order rejecting the petition to reopen evidence and granted the petitioner a final 15‑day window to conclude his evidence, subject to payment of costs.

Summary

Guddu Singh, the winning candidate in Election Petition No. 23 of 2021, filed an application to quash the order dated 06‑06‑2025 of the Munsif Sadar Motihari which rejected his request to reopen and adduce further evidence. The petitioner argued that the case had been pending since 2021 and that he needed only 15 working days to conclude his evidence. The respondents contended that the petitioner’s evidence had already been closed three times and that the recent application should be dismissed. The Patna High Court, considering the prolonged pendency and the interests of justice, allowed the petition, granting a final opportunity to present evidence within 15 working days, subject to a cost of Rs. 15,000 payable to the District Legal Services Authority. The order to reopen evidence was thus set aside and the petitioner was directed to complete his evidence on a day‑to‑day basis.

Issues considered

Whether the order rejecting the petitioner's request to reopen evidence can be quashed.
Whether further evidence may be admitted after the evidence has been closed multiple times.

Subjects

election petition
reopening evidence
cost order
District Legal Services Authority
procedural fairness
civil miscellaneous jurisdiction

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.940 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Guddu Singh Son of Mundrika Prasad, Resident of Village Madhopur
                 Govind, Ward No. 7, Mani Chhapra, Police Station Chakia, District- East
                 Champaran.

                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj
                 Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
           2.    The Secretary, State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna.
           3.    District Panchayat Raj Officer, East Champaran.
           4.    Block Development Officer, Kalyanpur, East Champaran.
           5.    Satyam Kartikey Vats Son of Umesh Kumar Singh, Resident of Village
                 Madhopur Govind, Mani Chhapra, Police Station Chakia, District- East
                 Champaran.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :     Mr.Rajnish Shandilya
                 For the Respondent/s   :     Mr.Government Pleader (19)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   27-02-2026                 The instant application has been filed for quashing the

                   order dated 06.06.2025 passed by Munsif Sadar Motihari, East

                   Champaran in Election Case No. 23 of 2021 by which learned

                   court has rejected his petition to reopen his evidence and to

                   adduce his further evidence.

                               2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

                   Election Petition No. 23 of 2021 he is respondent no. 5 and

                   winning candidate in the election and now he wants to re-open

                   and adduce some witnesses cited in the list.

                               3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent
          Patna High Court C.Misc. No.940 of 2025(5) dt.27-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                    submits that earlier evidence of the petitioner has been closed

                    three times but the same was again opened after imposing some

                    cost and by way of impugned order dated 06.06.2025 petition

                    filed by the petitioner again to adduce evidence was rejected.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he

                    wants only 15 working days to conclude his evidence.

                                 5. So, keeping in view the facts that the Election Case

                    No. 23 of 2021 is pending consideration since 2021 and for the

                    ends of justice, petitioner is again given a last chance to

                    conclude the evidence within 15 working days subject to

                    payment of cost of Rs. 15,000/- payable to the concerned

                    District Legal Services Authority. The above evidence shall be

                    concluded on day to day basis.

                                 6. With the aforesaid observation, the instant

                    application stands allowed.



                                                (S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…