Article 62(1)(f): SC issues notice to AGP

25 Aug, 2018

The Supreme Court issued notice to the Attorney-General for Pakistan (AGP) regarding interpretation of the Article 62(1)(f) of Constitution in case a person is acquitted of the criminal proceedings by the apex court. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Azmat Saeed and comprising Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan and Justice Munib Akhtar after hearing the plea issued notice to the Attorney General under Order XXVII.
Petitioner Hamza Rasheed Khan filed the appeal against the order of the Election Appellate Tribunal, Lahore High Court, allowing Khawaja Muhammad Islam to contest elections from PP-111, Faisalabad-XV. Hamza Rasheed had filed the nomination papers from PP-111 Faisalabad-XV as an independent candidate and then withdrew the same.
Kamran Murtaza appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while Azam Nazir Tarar represented the respondent. The defense counsel contended that in pursuant to the order, criminal proceedings were launched on the same allegations which have been culminated in an acquittal maintained up to this court vide order dated 18.07.2013. He argued whether such judgment of this court would washout the earlier observations purporting to be a declaration in terms of Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.
It was also argued whether a candidate who has withdrawn his nomination papers, can file a writ petition against the order dismissing the appeal filed against acceptance of the nomination papers of an opposing candidate. Azam Nazeer Tarrar, representing Islam, contended that the BBA degree of his client was declared fake in 2013 and subsequently criminal proceedings were initiated against him along with orders for de-seating him.
He, however, said after recording of evidence in the trial, his client's degree was proved genuine and he was acquitted from the charges. He said the high court and the top court dismissed appeals of the Election Commission of Pakistan and upheld the acquittal orders of his client. The court granted leave to consider, inter alia, the questions and adjourned the case for indefinite period.

Read Comments