Sagacious and righteous

Sufficient documentary evidence was available to establish the fact that respondent was not qualified to contest election for the seat of Provincial Assembly as well as Senate on the strength of fake and fictitious B.A. degree

Respondent made declaration in column meant for academic qualification and declared himself to be a graduate, though he was not

Effect

Respondent had to face consequences of Arts.62 & 63 of the Constitution, once there was disqualification, it was always disqualification

Election Tribunal directed the authorities to exclude name of respondent from list of validly nominated candidates and his nomination papers were rejected

Appeal was allowed in circumstances.

Figures of income declared by appellant did not tally with total income declared by him in Column No.12 of nomination papers

Appellant also declared an increase into his assets in year, 2012, as per detail given in column of assets of nomination papers but there was no explanation for such increase as to wherefrom source of such increase came

Scrutiny conducted by Returning Officer and perused by Election Tribunal reflected that appellant did not truly reflect his sources of income in different papers which did not even tally with each other

Such contradictions were of substantial nature and reflected seriously upon personal character of appellant

Provision of Art.62(f) of the Constitution had made fundamental qualification for being elected as member of Majlis-e-Shoora for a person that he should be a sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest and Ameen

Appellant was rightly adjudged by Returning Officer to be suffering from lack of qualifications mentioned in Art.62(f) of the Constitution

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Appellant had concealed his source of income regarding accretion as claimed by him and did not disclose in column of nomination papers specified for agricultural income any assets

Declaration of assets for year 2012, filed by appellant before Income Tax authorities, was also outcome of suppressing source of his acquisition of valuable property running into lac of Rupees

All such circumstances deprived appellant of necessary eligibility criteria prescribed in Art.62(f) of the Constitution

Returning Officer was fully justified in rejecting nomination papers of appellant

Election Tribunal maintained the order passed by Returning Officer

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.