Find a Lawyer

ABDUR REHMAN KHAN versus RETURNING OFFICER

In the election petition of the People's Act 1976, sections 52, 68, and 99, the defeated candidate challenged the selection of the return candidate in his election petition:: Returning candidate to pay off debts and public liabilities and election expenses. Was disqualified from contesting the election, rejecting all the allegations in his detailed written statement, saying that after submitting his nomination papers, he was informed by the High Court that he was aware of outstanding government dues and loans. Filed a constitutional petition in which the order restrained them as interim relief Found. The candidate also stated that since the constitutional petition involves the determination of controversial questions, he demanded the withdrawal of the constitutional application with permission to file a civil suit and the High Court not only filed a civil suit. Allowed to withdraw with permission, but also observed that there is no adverse effect on his candidacy, pending the filing of a civil suit in the affirmed Perry. After the dismissal of the constitutional petition, the returning candidate filed a civil suit in the civil suit under which the hearing order was granted in his favor. The pending suit, neither retired nor pressed by the courts. Had committed Any illegal or: In the election petition filed by the applicant as a corruption allegation, the retired candidate has fully proved that he / she has to pay the loan / public liabilities and utility expenses at the time of filing nomination or at the polling day. There was no denying. Against the back candidate, circumstances were dismissed tax advocates from Ranipur lawyer