Find a Lawyer

ALI AHMAD versus STATE

Representation of Section 5 of the People's Act 1976 The only question raised in the election petition was that the candidate returning at the time of filing the nomination was less than 25 years and thus unable to contest the evidence presented in support of such an objection was contradictory in nature. The different dates of return of the candidate were given according to the documents prepared by the applicant. The applicant could not present any other evidence which could prove the result of the retired candidate's age, however, the registrations were intended for the purpose. Were kept Enrollment in primary school which was premature and accordingly the candidate who returned at the time of submission of nomination papers was more than 25 years. Such evidence is further strengthened by the petition filed by the returning candidate in 1987. Found. It received a National Identity Card grant that looks like birth date with the help of a retired candidate and entered the Primary School Admissions Register where two sets of proofs were available on record, prioritizing the supporting candidate's evidence. Should the return candidate be successful in establishing through credible evidence that he had filed his nomination, he was less than 25 years of age at the time of filing the nomination papers. The nominee failed to remove the burden of proof on the candidate's age. property advocate from Panjgur lawyer