Find a Lawyer

EJAZ SHAFI versus ASHRAF SHAH, 1ST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KARACHI AND RETURNING OFFICER, KARACHI WEST

The allegation of the election petition of Articles 52 and 67 of the Public Act 1976 was that the Returning Officer had wrongly canceled a number of votes cast in favor of the election applicant, which was selected by the Returning Officer but later The defeat was announced on television. On appeal, the Supreme Court remanded the case to the Election Tribunal on the appeal and directed it to examine and examine the false ballot papers in the presence of the parties and their lawyer. In order to determine the invalidity of these ballot papers and for this purpose, the claim was to be recorded before the Election Tribunal to record the evidence of the Presiding Officers, which the Presiding Officers clearly stated in the post-remand proceedings before the Election Tribunal. Was that there were belt papers. The candidates or their representatives were counted in the presence, and all incorrect ballot papers were excluded, and the result was declared in their presence. Form IV was properly signed and signed by the authorized agent of the candidates. While ballot papers were being counted at the polling stations, no objection was taken by any of the candidates or their authorized agents, Nor was there any objection to the effect in the election petition that the applicant could not prove the allegation of wrongful cancellation of the votes cast in his favor was deducted from the total count of wrong votes. The request for additional investigation did not allege excessive invalid votes or invalid votes. The number of candidates solicitors from Machh lawyer