Priya Krishna v. The Returning Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REVIEW PETITION NO. 224 OF 2022 BETWEEN: PRIYA KRISHNA S/O SRI M. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2937/38E 'GOVARDHANA PRIYA' SERVICE ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560 040. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANANJAY K.V., ADVOCATE AND SRI. RAJENDRA B. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE RETURNING OFFICER FOR THE GOVINDARAJA NAGAR ASSEMBLY CONSTITUENCY-166 PALIKE SOUDHA, 14TH CROSS CHANDRA LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE BANGALORE-560 072 (NOW WORKING AS DEPUTY SECRETARY; BDA) by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:17202-DB RP(No.(224(of(2022 C/O.,THE,OFFICE,OF,CHIEF,ELECTORAL, OFFICER,KARNATAKA, AT,NIRVACHANA,NILAYA, SESHADRI,ROAD,, BANGALORE-560,001.,

¶2THE,CHIEF,ELECTORAL,,OFFICER, KARNATAKA, AT,NIRVACHANA,NILAYA,SESHADRI,ROAD,, BANGALORE-560,001.,

¶3THE,ELECTION,COMMISSIONER,OF,INDIA, AT,NIRVACHAN,SADAN, ASHOKA,ROAD,,, NEW,DELHI-110,001. …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SHARASHCHANDRA,RAMESH,DODAWAD,,,, ,,,,,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R1,TO,R3), , THIS,REVIEW,PETITION,UNDER,ORDER,47,,RULE,1, OF, THE, CPC,, 1908, READ, WITH, ARTICLE, 226, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, PRAYING, TO, REVIEW, THE, FINAL,ORDER,AND,JUDGMENT,DATED,05.01.2021,PASSED, IN,WRIT,APPEAL,NO.3829/2019,(GM-RES),AND,TO,ALLOW, THE,SAID,WRIT,APPEAL,AND,ETC., , THIS,PETITION,,COMING,ON,FOR,ADMISSION,,THIS, DAY,,ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM: HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,JAYANT,BANERJI and, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,RAJESH,RAI,K

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) When the matter was called up in the first round, the Junior counsel of the learned counsel for the review petitioner was present in Court, who sought an adjournment for the day, stating that his senior is busy in another Court. However, we declined to adjourn the matter for a day inasmuch as this review petition is pending since the year 2022 against the judgment dated

05.01.2021 passed in the Writ Appeal No.3829/2019, which could well be attended and the submissions could well be made by learned counsel for the review petitioner after attending the other Court.

¶2However, when the matter was called out again, no one appears for the review petitioner.

¶3The learned counsel for the respondents is present.

¶4We have perused the record. The learned Single Judge had held that the writ petition was filed seeking a direction to respondent No.1 therein i.e., the Returning Officer of the Govindaraja Nagar Assembly Constituency-116 to count the Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail ('VVPAT') in respect of 271 polling stations of that constituency and further for quashing the order dated

15.05.2018 passed by the Returning Officer on the application made by the petitioner rejecting the plea for counting the VVPAT slips. While dismissing the writ petition, it was observed that the impugned order could not be said to be perverse and did not suffer from the vice of non application of mind. Interference in the impugned order would amount to an exercise in futility. The writ petition was dismissed.

¶5In the writ appeal, the judgment of the learned Single Judge was considered and it was held that the petition was filed by the unsuccessful candidate who had chosen not to file an election petition which would, even

otherwise, be barred by limitation. It was held that it was wholly unnecessary to answer the contention of the counsel for the appellant insofar as correctness or otherwise of the impugned order is concerned. The appellant had accepted the outcome of the poll and had not challenged his defeat before the appropriate forum. The findings of the learned Single Judge were duly considered and upheld.

¶6We find no error apparent on the face of the record that would merit review of the impugned judgment. This review petition is accordingly dismissed. SD/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7