2025 PLP 1361 (YLR)

Asjad Javaid Ghural, J.

Through this appeal under Section 63 of the Election Act, 2017, appellant Muhammad Israr has called in question validity of order dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Returning Officer PP-127, Jhang-III, whereby he by over-ruling the objections raised by the appellant upon the nomination papers of respondent No.1 (respondent) accepted the same from the aforesaid constituency.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Returning Officer erred in law while accepting nomination papers of the respondent; that respondent's name has been listed in 4th Schedule of Anti Terrorism Act, 1997 vide order dated 26.12.2023; that CNIC and account of such a person has been blocked under the law; that active account is mandatory requirement for a candidate, which could not be fulfilled by the respondent; that the respondent was proclaimed offender in two criminal cases but he intentionally avoided to disclose the same in the nomination papers, which tantamounts to concealment of facts, as such nomination papers of the respondent are liable to be rejected.

3. On the converse, learned counsel for the respondent submits that inclusion of the name of a candidate in the 4th Schedule does not debar him to contest the elections; that registration of criminal cases bearing FIR No.302/14 was not in his knowledge, however, on coming to know about this case, respondent has availed pre-arrest bail which is effective; that the explanation offered by the respondent for not disclosing criminal case has rightly been accepted by the Returning Officer and no exception can be drawn therefrom.

4. Heard. It is a matter of record that respondent's name has been included in the list of 4th Schedule of the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997 by the Government of the Punjab, Home Department, vide order dated 26.12.2023. According to the said order money or any other property owned or controlled wholly or partly, directly or indirectly shall stand frozen. According to Section 60(2)(b) of the Elections Act, 2017, opening of a dedicated account for the purpose of election expenses is essential for every candidate. Since, during the existence of aforesaid order, respondent's account remained frozen and he is unable to utilize the same for the purpose of election expenses, therefore, this fact alone is sufficient to preclude him from contesting the forthcoming elections.

5. Moreover, admittedly, the respondent is proclaimed offender in case FIR No.302/14 since 29.09.2015 and challan against him under section 512 Cr.P.C. was submitted in the Trial Court on 15.12.2015 but this case was not disclosed by him in his affidavit. Although the respondent claimed ignorance of registration of any such case against him and also secured pre-arrest bail in the aforesaid case but the explanation qua non-awareness of said case does not appeal to reasons. Respondent was declared proclaimed offender after adopting proper procedure of law, as such he cannot claim that he was not aware of said case. Further, he is fugitive from law in the aforesaid criminal case for the last more than eight years, therefore, securing him pre-arrest bail in the said case, after objections of the objectors does not change his status of proclaimed offender. Reliance is placed on case reported as "Hussain Bux and another v. District and Sessions Judge/District Returning Officer and Appellate Authority, Sanghar and others (2002 CLC 281)" wherein it has been laid down as under;- "The proclamation was issued under section 87, Cr.P.C. by the trial Court which was followed by the order of the attachment of property under section 88, Cr.P.C. However, after the nomination forms were rejected on this ground, the petitioner approached this Court and obtained protective bail. The conduct and behavior that the petitioner No.1 demonstrates that petitioner No.1 has thwarted the process of the Court and is fugitive from law. Merely because the petitioner No.1 had sought protective bail, therefore, it cannot be said that the absconsion order and proclamation orders have been undone by the grant of protective bail which was granted for a limited period."

6. Furthermore, Police Officer, in attendance, has disclosed that the respondent is also a proclaimed offender in case FIR No.222/11 dated 08.04.2011 for the last more than one decade and in this case admittedly the respondent has not surrendered before the Court of law. Respondent has also concealed this case in his affidavit which amounts to concealment of facts, rendering the respondent ineligible to contest the elections. Reliance is placed on case reported as "Muzafar Abbas v. Maulana Muhammad Ahmad Ludhianvi and 31 others (PLD 2017 Lahore 394)."

7. Returning Officer has failed to take into consideration valid objections of the appellant and proceeded to accept the nomination papers in hasty manner, which cannot be allowed to hold the field. Resultantly, instant appeal is allowed as a result whereof nomination papers of the respondent from constituency No.PP-127, Jhang-III, stands rejected. MQ/M-50/L Appeal allowed.