Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 1743 2014 SLD 1743 2014 CLC 1042
Election Tribunal, Sindh
Election Petition No.8 of 2013, decision dated: 21st April, 2014.
DR. ZAFAR AHMED KHAN SHERWANI, ELECTION TRIBUNAL

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Mir SHAHNAWAZ KHAN

VS

MANZOOR HUSSAIN WASSAN and 13 others

Law:

Section:

Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976)-------Ss. 33(2), (3), 46 & 70(a)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.129(e)--- Election petition--- Fake thumb-impressions on counterfoils, verification of---Non-usage of magnetized ink during the polling---Effect---Substantial (but not complete) compliance with the voting procedure---Counterfoils of the used ballot papers in respect of 81 polling stations as well as used pictorial electoral rolls were forwarded to National Database and Registration Authority ("NADRA") for verification of thumb-impressions of the voters---Report submitted by NADRA showed that it had received 61307 counterfoils bearing thumb-impressions, out of which only 28295 could be authenticated/ verified; that only 248 failed such authentication, whereas 22525 thumb-impressions failed authentication on account of their bad quality and 10239 were not processed on account of other different reasons---Plea of petitioner that since only 46.1% of the total valid votes could be authenticated/verified by NADRA on account of use of unapproved quality of ink (non-magnetized) by the election machinery in the process of taking thumb-impressions of the electors before issuing ballot paper to them as required under S.33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1976, therefore the result of the election had been materially affected in terms of S.70(a) of the said Act and required to be declared void as a whole--- Validity--- Although Election Commission("ECP") had approved the use of magnetized ink during the poll as per sample approved by NADRA and the same quality of ink was purchased from concerned authorities and supplied to the election officials at the polling stations but NADRA's report indicated that the ink used during the process was either not magnetized or deficit of such properties as approved by the ECP ---Even if it was admitted that the quality of ink as approved by the ECP was not used, the Election Tribunal could not declare the election as a whole void because substantial compliance with provisions of S.33 of the Act had been made as admittedly the counterfoils having thumb-impressions which could not be authenticated were bearing…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492