| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 306 2020 SLD 306 2020 YLR 132 |
Sindh High Court
Election Petition No. S-19 of 2018, decision Dated: 24-04-2019. Dates of hearing: 27th November, 13th December, 2018, 22nd January and 13th February, 2019.
MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Salahuddin Ahmed assisted by Sheikh Arsalan
Respondent(s) by: Abdul Sattar Pirzada assisted by Mamoon N. Chaudhry and Deedar Ali M. Chohan No.3. Shahryar Imdad Awan, Assistant Advocate General Sindh
Election Petition No. S-19 of 2018, decision Dated: 24-04-2019. Dates of hearing: 27th November, 13th December, 2018, 22nd January and 13th February, 2019.
MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Salahuddin Ahmed assisted by Sheikh Arsalan
Respondent(s) by: Abdul Sattar Pirzada assisted by Mamoon N. Chaudhry and Deedar Ali M. Chohan No.3. Shahryar Imdad Awan, Assistant Advocate General Sindh
JAM SAIFULLAH KHAN
VS
ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN (ECP) THROUGH SECRETARY AND 17 OTHERS
Law: Elections Act, 2017
Section: 90,90(4)(c),90(10)(13)(14),158
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 151
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 18,72,80,84
Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017)--- ----Ss. 90 & 158---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 80---Comparison of signatures on Form-45---Elections Tribunal could declare the election as a whole to be void if it was satisfied that the result of election had been materially affected by failure to comply with the provisions of Elections Act, 2017 or the Rules in connivance with the returned candidate or prevalence of extensive corrupt or illegal practice at the elections---Connivance did not need to be specific and/or apparent and it could be implied, disguised and hidden---Once a person was able to prove the violation of S. 90 of Elections Act, 2017 then connivance might not be difficult to be unveiled---Scrutiny could not be refused on the ground that the petitioner was required to prove the connivance first---Petitioner could be afforded a fair opportunity to prove and discharge the burden that the statute had required---If the provisions of Elections Act, 2017 and Rules framed thereunder had not been complied then scrutiny was inevitable as first step and then to determine as to what extent such non-compliance either unilaterally or in connivance with the office holder/returned candidate had materially affected the result of elections---Elections Commission was directed to submit original Form-45 to National Forensic Science Agency for a forensic examination of signatures, handwriting and thumb impressions of Presiding Officers and/or Assistant Presiding Officers---Petition for comparison of signatures on Form-45 was accepted in circumstances. Qaisar Ifraheem Saroya v. Returning Officer and 2 others 1995 CLC 917 and Syed Mukhtar Hussain Shah v. Wasim Sajjad and others PLD 1986 SC 178 ref. Sardar Abdul Hafeez Khan v. Sardar Tahir Khan Loni and 13 others 1999 SCMR 284; Feroze Ahmed Jamali v. Masroor Ahmed Khan Jatoi 2016 SCMR 750; Irfanullah Khan Marwat v. M. Abdul Rauf Siddiqui 2017 SCMR 1588 and Aijaz Hussain Jakhrani v. Illahi Bux Soomro and 16 others PLD 2014 Kar. 90 rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MUHAMMAD SHAFI SIDDIQUI, J.--- This application, filed by the petitioner is to be dealt with in priority before the trial commences. This is an application under…
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