1994 PLP 113 (SCMR)
Miss YASMIN KHAN and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD through
| Citation | 1994 PLP 113 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, CJ., Shafiur Rahman, Saad Sood Jan, Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Ajmal Mian, JJ |
| Parties | Miss YASMIN KHAN and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD through |
| Primary Law | Electoral Rolls Act (XXI of 1974)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 113 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Electoral Rolls Act (XXI of 1974)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 113 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, CJ., Shafiur Rahman, Saad Sood Jan, Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Ajmal Mian, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 113 (SCMR) (Miss YASMIN KHAN and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD through). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shaikh, Advocate instructed by Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- M. Sardar Khan, Attorney‑General for Pakistan and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Deputy Attorney‑General for Pakistan for Respondents (on Court's Notice).
- Date of hearing: 4th October, 1993.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 7‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 51, 184 (3), 199, 187 (1), 189 & 190‑‑‑Exercise of right of franchise by persons holding Pakistan Passports and National Identity Cards while living abroad for earning their livelihood‑‑‑Apart from persons who were not enrolled as voters, even recorded voters living abroad, were not in a position, at present, to exercise right of vote, there being an impediment to the exercise of right of franchise even of those who were so enrolled‑‑‑Constitutional implications of such denial would need proper examination in depth‑‑=Such grievance being continuing one and not confined to any particular election, in any case, not to the one currently taking place, leave to appeal was granted to examine the question raised.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑‑The two petitioners have by recourse to Article 184 (3) read with Articles 199 and 187 (1), 189 and 190 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan sought enrolment as voter, so as to enable them to participate in the process of election for choosing the members of the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies.
2. Their case in a nutshell is that they are permanent residents of Pakistan and happen to be abroad earning their livelihood. They hold Pakistani Passports. They possess National Identity Cards. Their ordinary place of residence is outside the territories of Pakistan. They are being refused registration as voters under section 7 of the Electoral Rolls Act, 1974 and for that reason are unable to exercise their right of vote. Their contention is that the Constitution by Article 51 grants them the right to have their names on the Electoral Roll of the territory shown as their permanent residence/ address and further arrangements have to be made in the Electoral Rolls for the effective exercise of their right of franchise while they happen to be outside the country. At present, according to the petitioners, even if the names appear on the Electoral Roll there is no arrangement in existence for the exercise of vote by such recorded voters while they are residing abroad. They are necessarily required to come back and exercise the right to vote in the constituency where they are entered in the voters list.
3. It appeared during the course of hearing, that the petitioners have not themselves made any effort to get themselves enrolled as voters on the strength of documents and material in their power or possession. Nevertheless, as even the recorded voters living abroad are not in a position, at present, to exercise the right of vote, there is indeed an impediment in the exercise of right of franchise even of those who are so enrolled.
4. We consider that the Constitutional implication of such denials needs proper examination in depth. As the grievance is continuing one and not confined to any particular election, in any case not to the one currently being held, we admit this petition to regular hearing. Notice to issue to all concerned in the matter. AA./M‑1834/S Leave granted.