Law: Elections Act, 2017

Section: 62(9)

Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017)--- ----S. 62(9), second proviso---Election dispute---Nomination papers, acceptance of---Defect not substantial---Petitioner was aggrieved of acceptance of nomination papers of respondent / candidate by Election Tribunal---Plea raised by petitioner was that in nomination papers respondent / candidate did not declare certain properties owned by him through inheritance and land owned by his wife as well as weapons owned by him were also not disclosed---Validity---It was duty of Returning Officer to scrutinize nomination papers in the best interest of justice and to uphold fundamental rights of individual to contest elections---Instead of rejecting nomination papers, Returning Officer could direct respondent / candidate to mention the same in statement of assets---Returning Officer, in view of second proviso to S. 62(9) of Elections Act, 2017, should not reject any nomination paper on the ground of any defect which was not of a substantial nature and may allow such defect to be remedied---There was no column in election form where a candidate could give details of his weapons but the value of weapons were duly disclosed / mentioned in statement of assets---Respondent / candidate could contest election as independent candidate or to participate with certificate of a party as candidate of such party, as there was no bar---High Court declined to interfere in order passed by Election Tribunal accepting nomination papers of respondent / candidate---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. C.Ps. Nos.151 and 152 of 2024; PLD 2024 SC 571 and C.P. No.183 of 2024 rel. JUDGMENT MASUD ABID NAQVI, J.----Through this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity of impugned order dated 26.03.2024, passed by the learned Election Tribunal whereby the Election Appeal filed by respondent No.1 was allowed by setting aside order dated 21.03.2024 passed by the Returning Officer, PP-32, Gujrat-VI and the nomination papers of respondent No.1 were accepted. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is aggrieved from the findings of learned Election Tribunal in impugned order dated…

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