Sharifs' eligibility case: every citizen entitled to challenge nomination of a candidate: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, bench hearing cases pertaining to Sharif brothers' right to contest the elections, on Thursday observed that every citizen was entitled to challenge the nomination of a candidate, who did not deserve to be elected. The bench observed this in response to the argument that Khurram Shah, who challenged candidature of Sharifs, was not a voter of his constituency.
"If a person is apparently and patently disqualified to contest the elections, is it not the duty of High Court to stop him from being elected, questioned Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali. A three-member bench of the apex court, comprising Justice Moosa K Leghari, Justice Sakhi Hussain Bokhari and Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali, adjourned the hearing till February 16.
The bench had taken up the appeal of the Federation against the verdict of Lahore High Court (LHC), which disqualified Nawaz Sharif to contest the election, and had kept its decision pending against the candidature of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif till the decision of the election tribunal.
Mehr Zafar Iqbal and Shakil Beg, the proposer and seconder of Nawaz Sharif respectively, through an application had requested the Supreme Court judges, hearing the candidature of Sharif brothers to withdraw themselves from the proceedings and instead refer the matter to the Chief Justice to constitute a different bench, comprising pre-emergency judges to do complete justice.
Punjab Advocate General Khwaja Haris, who appeared before the court on behalf of the Punjab government, said that the appellate tribunal never took up the matter relating to Shahbaz Sharif, and no allegations of any sort were levelled against him during the proceedings.
He said that the tribunal was constituted under Section 14(5) of the Representation of People's Act 1976 to decide the appeals within a stipulated time period, adding a contesting candidate was given the right to file such appeal.
Haris said that the tribunal, in case of default, could issue a show cause notice, but in Shahbaz Sharif's case, show cause notice was not issued which implied that the tribunal was not convinced on the allegations of default. Talking about "source" for laying down the information before the tribunal according to Section 14-5(a) of Representation of People's Act 1976, he said that source did not mean any person rather it was for the institution to whom candidate was a defaulter which could inform the tribunal.
Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali observed that the function of 5(a) was introduced so that a defaulter could not be elected. Ahmed Raza Kasuri, counsel for Noor Elahi and Khurram Shah, interrupting the proceedings, said that there was an outstanding amount of Rs 6,143 against Sharifs.
Khwaja Harris, while responding to the allegation, said that there was not a single example of any outstanding amount given at any particular time, adding that Khurram Shah, who challenged Shahbaz Shairf's candidature from PP 48 Bakar, was not a voter of that constituency rather he was from Lahore. Justice Sheikh Hakim Ali observed that in a co-warrant application, it was not necessary for the applicant that he was an aggrieved party.
Anyone could file the application, he added. Earlier, Advocate Akram Sheikh also apprised the court that Khurram Shah was a close associate of former chief minister Pervaiz Ellahi. He had alleged that Khurram Shah was a ghost and had no existence. The court adjourned the hearing till February 16.