MUHAMMAD HASHIM SIDDIQUI versus IQBAL MUHAMMAD ALI KHAN
Sections 55, 63 63 and Election 67 failed the election petition challenging the selection of a retired candidate alleging that the returning candidate committed corruption and illegal practices, fraud and fraudulent voting and other irregularities. Is. And other relevant persons had given the applicant a long list of allegations against the returning candidate, but failed to present the material facts on which he relied on the applicant's evidence and his testimony was ambiguous, Were not devoid of any substance to inspire sketches and confidence. Inspected by a polling staff or other officer to support their case, and no official record was sought or presented in support of their case by the petitioner, nor has the petition stated Nor does it prove how his choice was affected by non-compliance with the provisions of his election. The Act and the Rules made under it failed against the Petitioners, giving full details of the names, places and alleged corruption or illegal proceedings or any other illegal work done, such as the means by which to make a decision in their favor. The applicant or his witnesses did not name any voter who was allegedly targeted or whose name allowed anyone to vote in a non-controversial manner, He did not even name the staff who assisted the candidate in the request for the returning candidate, in the circumstances, I am requesting that the election was also the case, were not considered and returned Amy
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
