2024 PLP 461 (SCMR)
Sardar CONFUCIUS IMRAN QASRANI and another — Appellants Versus Sardar Mir BADSHAH KHAN QAISRANI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2024 PLP 461 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Qazi Faez Isa, C.J., Amin-ud-Din Khan and Athar Minallah, JJ |
| Parties | Sardar CONFUCIUS IMRAN QASRANI and another — Appellants Versus Sardar Mir BADSHAH KHAN QAISRANI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2024 PLP 461 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2024 PLP 461 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Qazi Faez Isa, C.J., Amin-ud-Din Khan and Athar Minallah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2024 PLP 461 (SCMR) (Sardar CONFUCIUS IMRAN QASRANI and another — Appellants Versus Sardar Mir BADSHAH KHAN QAISRANI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Saqib Jillani, Advocate Supreme Court (via video-link from Lahore) for Appellants (in C.As. Nos. 981 and 985 of 2018).
- Sh. Usman Karim-ud-Din, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in C.A. No. 984 of 2018).
- Khalid Ibn-e-Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No. 1 (in C.A. No. 981 of 2018).
- ----S. 232(2)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 62(1)(f)---Elections for seat of Provincial and National Assembly---Eligibility---Disqualification period under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution---Counsel for the appellants stated that disqualification was for life by relying on the decision in the case of Sami Ullah Baloch v. Abdul Karim Nausherwani (PLD 2018 Supreme Court 405) which held that when Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is attracted, the disqualification is for life---However, the counsel for the respondent disputed this and stated that the period of disqualification was for five years as per section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, which provision was enacted through the Elections (Amendment) Act, 2023, promulgated on 26 June 2023---Counsel were unanimous in stating that unless there was a clear pronouncement by the Supreme Court on the matter the returning officers in the forthcoming general elections may wonder whether to apply section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, or the said judgment of the Supreme Court, which may create needless confusion in the elections and shall not be conducive to democracy, and that there was also the likelihood of election tribunals and courts being inundated with cases arising out of the uncertainty---Supreme Court directed that notices under Order XXVIIA of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were to be issued to the Attorney-General, to all the Advocate Generals of the provinces, to the Election Commission of Pakistan and public notice be published in a prominent English and Urdu newspaper having wide circulation as the decision in these appeals may also affect those who are not parties hereto; that concise statements attending to the said constitutional and legal questions, without reference to facts and the particulars of individual cases may be filed; that pendency of these appeals and the questions raised herein shall not be used as a pretext to delay the forthcoming general elections scheduled to be held on 8 February 2024, and that these cases, and any others involving the same question, be fixed for hearing in early January, 2024 before a Bench constituted by the Committee under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023.
- 4. The learned AAG points out that the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 ('the Act') requires that where constitutional interpretation is required a Bench of a minimum of five Judges has to hear it. He further states that the interpretation of a Federal law, the Constitution and applicability of the decision of the Supreme Court is required, which will also impact elections to the provincial assemblies, and as such requisite notices be issued. Therefore, notices under Order XXVII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 be issued to the Attorney-General for Pakistan and to all the Advocate Generals of the provinces. Notice be also issued to the Election Commission of Pakistan and public notice be published in a prominent English and Urdu newspaper having wide circulation as the decision in these appeals may also affect those who are not parties hereto.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 232(2)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 62(1)(f)
Elections for seat of Provincial and National Assembly
Disqualification period under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution
Counsel for the appellants stated that disqualification was for life by relying on the decision in the case of Sami Ullah Baloch v. Abdul Karim Nausherwani (PLD 2018 Supreme Court 405) which held that when Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution is attracted, the disqualification is for life
However, the counsel for the respondent disputed this and stated that the period of disqualification was for five years as per section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, which provision was enacted through the Elections (Amendment) Act, 2023, promulgated on 26 June 2023
Counsel were unanimous in stating that unless there was a clear pronouncement by the Supreme Court on the matter the returning officers in the forthcoming general elections may wonder whether to apply section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, or the said judgment of the Supreme Court, which may create needless confusion in the elections and shall not be conducive to democracy, and that there was also the likelihood of election tribunals and courts being inundated with cases arising out of the uncertainty
Supreme Court directed that notices under Order XXVIIA of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were to be issued to the Attorney-General, to all the Advocate Generals of the provinces, to the Election Commission of Pakistan and public notice be published in a prominent English and Urdu newspaper having wide circulation as the decision in these appeals may also affect those who are not parties hereto; that concise statements attending to the said constitutional and legal questions, without reference to facts and the particulars of individual cases may be filed; that pendency of these appeals and the questions raised herein shall not be used as a pretext to delay the forthcoming general elections scheduled to be held on 8 February 2024, and that these cases, and any others involving the same question, be fixed for hearing in early January, 2024 before a Bench constituted by the Committee under the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023. Sami Ullah Baloch v. Abdul Karim Nausherwani PLD 2018 SC 405 ref. M. Arshad, D.G. (Law) and Falak Sher, Legal Consultant for ECP. Rana Asadullah Khan, Additional A.G.P. for Federation.
Judgment & Decree
Qazi Faez Isa, C.J. These appeals pertain to the disqualification of candidates who wanted to contest elections. In Civil Appeals Nos.981 and 985 of 2018 the parties are the same; one appeal is with regard to a Provincial Assembly seat and the other to a National Assembly seat. In Civil Appeal No.984/2018 the parties are different but the issue is the same. The general elections of 2008 required candidates to have a minimum graduation qualification. Some candidates made misdeclarations in their requisite nomination papers, some produced degrees from unrecognized institutions and others fake degrees to show eligibility of their participation in the general elections. This court had disqualified all such candidates and some also faced criminal prosecution. The respondent No. 1 in Civil Appeals Nos.981 and 985 of 2018 was convicted for a period of two years, and we are informed that his appeal against conviction is pending before the Multan Bench of the Lahore High Court, however, for the person who purportedly produced a fake degree in Civil Appeal No. 984 of 2018 there was no criminal prosecution. In view of the fact that a criminal appeal is pending adjudication before the Lahore High Court, we steered clear of this aspect and only concern ourselves with the question of disqualification of candidates.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants states that disqualification is for life by relying on the decision in the case of Sami Ullah Baloch v. Abdul Karim Nausherwani (PLD 2018 Supreme Court 405) which held that when Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 ('the Constitution') is attracted, the disqualification is for life. However, the learned counsel for the respondent in Civil Appeals Nos. 981 and 985 of 2018 disputes this and states that the period of disqualification is for five years as per section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, which provision was enacted through the Elections (Amendment) Act, 2023, promulgated on 26 June 2023. The learned Additional Attorney General ('AAG') also relies on the said statutory provision, reproduced hereunder: '232(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions of this Act, and other law for the time being in force and judgment, order or decree of any court, including the Supreme Court and a High Court, the disqualification of a person to be elected, chosen or to remain as a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) or a Provincial Assembly under paragraph (f) of clause (1) of Article 62 of the Constitution shall be for a period not exceeding five years from the declaration by the court of law in that regard and such declaration shall be subject to the due process of law.'
3. We inquired from the learned counsel whether section 232(2) of the Elections Acts, 2017 has been challenged and they said that they are not aware of a challenge thereto. However, the learned counsel are unanimous in stating that unless there is a clear pronouncement by this Court on the matter the returning officers in the forthcoming general elections may wonder whether to apply section 232(2) of the Elections Act, 2017, or the said judgment of this Court, which may create needless confusion in the elections and shall not be conducive to democracy. There is also the likelihood of election tribunals and courts being inundated with cases arising out of the uncertainty.
4. The learned AAG points out that the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 ('the Act') requires that where constitutional interpretation is required a Bench of a minimum of five Judges has to hear it. He further states that the interpretation of a Federal law, the Constitution and applicability of the decision of the Supreme Court is required, which will also impact elections to the provincial assemblies, and as such requisite notices be issued. Therefore, notices under Order XXVII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 be issued to the Attorney-General for Pakistan and to all the Advocate Generals of the provinces. Notice be also issued to the Election Commission of Pakistan and public notice be published in a prominent English and Urdu newspaper having wide circulation as the decision in these appeals may also affect those who are not parties hereto.
5. Concise statements attending to the said constitutional and legal questions, without reference to facts and the particulars of individual cases may be filed. It is clarified that the pendency of these appeals and the questions raised herein shall not be used as a pretext to delay the forthcoming general elections scheduled to be held on 8 February 2024.
6. These cases, and any others involving the same question, be fixed for hearing in early January, 2024 before a Bench constituted by the Committee under the Act. MWA/C-42/SC Order accordingly.