MUHAMMAD HANIF vs ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD and 5
This constitutional petition challenges the election results for the seats of Nazim and Naib Nazim of a Union Council. The petitioner, who filed joint nomination papers with a candidate whose nomination was rejected due to a bogus educational certificate, sought to challenge the election of the returned candidates. The petitioner alleged that the successful candidate was disqualified based on intelligence reports labeling him a police tout. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the proviso to Rule 18(3) of the Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000, which mandates the rejection of joint nominations if one candidate is disqualified, is repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam. The Court dismissed the petition in limine, holding that hearsay intelligence reports cannot form the basis for disqualification. Regarding the constitutional challenge, the Court ruled that the petitioner, having voluntarily filed joint nomination papers, accepted the legal consequences of joint candidacy. Crucially, the Court held that it lacks jurisdiction to declare statutory provisions repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam, as such authority is exclusively vested in the Shariat Court under the Constitution.
- Can a High Court declare a statutory provision repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam?
- Does the rejection of one candidate's nomination in a joint ticket necessitate the rejection of the entire joint nomination?
- Can hearsay intelligence reports serve as a valid basis for disqualifying a candidate in an election?
- Rule 18(3), Punjab Local Government Elections Rules 2000
- Article 203-D, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' Petitioner alongwith one Shams-ulHaq, filed joint nomination papers, to contest the election for the seats of Nazim and Naib Nazim of the concerned Union Council. The nomination papers of Shams-ul-Haq, were rejected as his Matriculation Certificate, was found to be bogus; against the above, an appeal was filed, but without any success. Subsequently, the elections were conducted and respondents Nos.5 and 6, have been declared as returned candidates.
2. It is the case of the petitioner, that the Government of Pakistan, has conducted a thorough investigation through the officials of the Intelligence Department for the candidates of Nazim and Naib-Nazim; and as per such reports, Haq Nawaz/respondent No,5, is found to be a police tout, therefore, he is disqualified to contest the election and hold the post. According to this plea, it may be held, that in law no reliance can be placed upon the so-called intelligence reports, which are of hearsay nature, besides no such report has been placed on the record, therefore, the argument of the learned counsel is repelled.
3. As regards the other submission, that proviso to Rule 18(3) of the Punjab Local Government Elections Rules, 2000, i.e, "Provided that in case of rejection of the nominations of either a Nazim or a Naib Nazim as joint candidates, the nomination as a whole for both the joint candidates shall stand rejected.", is repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam.
' I am afraid, this argument has no force. The petitioner and Shams-ul-Haq, themselves on the basis of the Election Laws, have submitted their joint nomination papers, thus, they shared the qualification and disqualification of each other, and if, one of the joint candidates, has been declared to be disqualified, obviously, the other joint candidate, would also sink alongwith him. In any case, as per the provisions of Article 203-D of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, to examine and declare any provision of the statute as repugnant to the Injuctions of Islam, the Holy Qur'an or Sunnah of the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.), is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Shariat Court. This petition, thus, has no merits and is hereby dismissed in limine.
Cited by 5 cases
- Shoukat Ali vs Government of Pakistan through Secretary Interior, Ministry 2023 IHC 352, 2024 PLD Islamabad 135
- SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN Versus Dr. MUHAMMAD ARIF 2018 PLC(CS) 907
- SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN Versus Dr. MUHAMMAD ARIF 2017 PLC(CS)N 66
- Secretary, Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan vs Dr. 2016 IHC
- SECRETARY, ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN vs Dr. 2017 PLC (C.S.) 907