Petitioner Allowed to Vote in Rajya Sabha Election from Police Custody

The court acknowledged the petitioner's right to vote in the Rajya Sabha election from police custody, allowing him to cast his vote under strict police security and custody. Compliance with the court order dated 16.6.2020 was emphasized, with the State assuring adherence to the order. The petitioner's multiple petitions before different authorities were noted, leading to further investigation and direction to provide the petition filed before the lower court for review. The case was scheduled for a subsequent hearing, with an order to be sent to the Chief Secretary for ensuring compliance with the Magistrate's order allowing the petitioner to vote.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Petitioner's right to vote in the Rajya Sabha election from police custody.
2. Compliance with the court order dated 16.6.2020.
3. Filing of multiple petitions by the petitioner before different authorities.

Analysis:

1. The main issue in this judgment revolves around the petitioner's right to vote in the Rajya Sabha election while in police custody. The SDJM, Dhanbad had allowed the petitioner, through a petition filed by the Jail Superintendent, to cast his vote in the forthcoming election. The order specified that the petitioner would be taken to the Vidhan Sabha for voting and then returned to Dhanbad Mandal Kara under strict police security and custody. The court acknowledged the compliance of this order and directed the Jail Superintendent and Senior Superintendent of Police to ensure its implementation.

2. The compliance with the court order dated 16.6.2020 was a significant aspect of the judgment. The Advocate General assured the court that the State would adhere to the order and emphasized that other issues raised in the writ petition had become infructuous. The court noted the submission and decided to keep the criminal writ petition pending due to the petitioner's filing of an application before the SDJM, Dhanbad for similar relief. The petitioner was directed to provide the petition filed before the lower court through the Jail Superintendent for further examination.

3. The judgment also addressed the issue of the petitioner filing multiple petitions before different authorities. The court highlighted that the petitioner had filed an application before the Magistrate, which was granted on 16.6.2020, before the case was listed in the High Court. The court expressed the need to investigate this matter further and directed the petitioner to present the petition filed before the lower court through the Jail Superintendent for review. The case was scheduled for a subsequent hearing after two weeks, and a copy of the order was to be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State of Jharkhand for ensuring compliance with the Magistrate's order allowing the petitioner to vote in the election.

---