2006 PLP 1918 (CLC)
HAROON AKHTAR KHAN — Applicant Versus Sheikh AMJAD AZIZ and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1918 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Election Tribunal (Punjab) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HAROON AKHTAR KHAN — Applicant Versus Sheikh AMJAD AZIZ and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1918 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Representation of the People Act (LXXXV of 1976) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1918 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Election Tribunal (Punjab) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1918 (CLC) (HAROON AKHTAR KHAN — Applicant Versus Sheikh AMJAD AZIZ and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ijaz Ahmad Awan for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 52
Application seeking permission to place on record photocopies of certain documents
Photocopies of documents annexed with application and sought to be placed on record were not part of record of election petition or any other judicial record
Said documents were not certified copies and their authenticity and genuineness was also uncertain
Veracity and correctness of said documents had been challenged by the other party, who labelled those documents as forged documents
No "good cause" for non-production of said documents earlier had been shown nor those were above suspicion--Election Tribunal, in circumstances declined to exercise its discretion favouring the applicant.
Judgment & Decree
JUSTICE MIAN HAMID FAROOQ (ELECTION TRIBUNAL).
Applicant, Sheikh Amjad Aziz, through the present application, filed on 26-2-2004, seeks permission to place on record photocopies of certain documents, which are attached and find mention in para.5 of the application. This application has been opposed by the adversary.
2. The only ground, urged in support of the application in hand and, canvassed by the learned counsel for the applicant, is that the applicant has now been able to lay hand upon certain documents, which are genuine and their production at the relevant time was not within the power of applicant, as these documents were not in his custody. Latter has refuted the said contention and opposed placing on record these documents.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the available record. Photocopies of the documents, annexed with the application and sought to be placed on record, are not part of record of the election petition or any other judicial record. These documents are not certified copies and their authenticity and genuineness is also uncertain. The veracity and correctness of' these documents have been challenged by the other party, who labelled them as forged documents. No "good cause" for earlier non-production of these documents has been shown nor those are above suspicion. Under the circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise my discretion favouring the applicant and is not persuaded to allow this application.
4. In the above perspective, the present application is dismissed being devoid of merits. H.B.T./H-21/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Application dismissed.